ArticleBMC palliative care2025
Medical decision-making experiences of persons with dementia and their carepartners: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attitudes of Older Patients and Caregivers in Japan Towards Deprescribing: A Cross-Sectional Study.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2026Article
- Latino Caregiver Experiences With Dementia Care and Healthcare Navigation.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersons with dementia (PWD) and their carepartners must often make complex medical decisions, weighing the benefits of medical (surgical and non-surgical) interventions with uncertainty regarding outcomes, both dementia- and non-dementia related, in the short-term and long-term. This study informs gaps in clinical guidance for patient-centered decision-making about medical and surgical interventions for PWD and advancecare planning.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study using thematic analysis based on semi-structured interviews with PWD and carepartners.
resultsWe interviewed 30 participants (9 PWD, 21 carepartners). Four themes were identified (with related subthemes): 1) PWD and carepartners varied in using decision-making approaches for medical interventions for PWD (a) variations in views about decision-making load; (b) Progressive involvement of carepartners in ACP decision-making as cognition erodes; 2) medical intervention decisions were an inflection point to evaluate values for dyads and involved tradeoffs with implications for end-of-life care and quality of life 3) lack of discussion with clinical team about impact of medical interventions on dementia burdened dyads; 4) decisional quality was facilitated by: (a) a trusting relationship with clinicians; and (b) a multidisciplinary team approach.
conclusionMost patients with mild-to-moderate dementia and carepartners approach medical intervention decision-making guided by their understanding of the dementia prognosis, but the risks of medical interventions are often unaddressed in discussions with the clinical team, sometimes burdening dyads with undesirable consequences to their quality-of-life. Clinicians should provide dementia-related risks regarding medical intervention outcomes to best facilitate decision-making conversations and advance care planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.