ArticleDisability and rehabilitation2025
Codesign of a framework to support compassionate care appropriate to technology use by people with cognitive decline.
Article in Disability and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo further develop and begin to validate the Framework for Compassionate Use of Technology with Persons with Cognitive Decline and their Care Partners.
methodsWe used an experience-based co-design approach. Phase 1 involved interviews with participants with cognitive decline and their care partners to increase our understanding of their perceptions of home monitoring technology use. Phase 2 involved Focus group meetings with participants with cognitive decline, their care partners, healthcare providers and technology researchers to seek feedback on the framework and develop tools to support a compassionate approach to the use of home monitoring technology.
resultsDomains and categories identified during interviews were (a) Ethical Principles including Addressing Privacy Concerns, Considering Dignity, Balancing Risks with Benefits, and Supporting Autonomy; and (b) Usefulness and Preferences including Technology Utility, Need for Maintenance, and Preferences for Information Receipt. These findings along with focus group discussions aligned with and further elaborated the framework. Focus groups also informed the development of tools to support a compassionate approach to recommending and selecting home monitoring technology.
conclusionsThe study provides initial support for the framework. More research is needed to test applicability and the usefulness in practice settings.
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.