Trial reportJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2025
Comparative Effectiveness of Two Methods for Assigning Care Coordinators to People Living With Dementia.
Trial report in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Care Coordination and Hospitalization in Older Adults With or at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Family Caregivers and the Need to Navigate Healthcare for People with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Reply to: Comment on "Comparative Effectiveness of Two Methods for Assigning Care Coordinators to People Living With Dementia".Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe sought to determine the comparative effectiveness of two strategies for assigning care coordinators to people living with dementia (PLWD) and their caregivers.
methodsWe conducted a pragmatic randomized clinical trial embedded in a Medicare accountable care organization (ACO) in New York, NY in 2022-2024. We included community-dwelling PLWD ≥ 65 years who were attributed to the ACO and had highly fragmented ambulatory care in the previous year (reversed Bice-Boxerman Index ≥ 0.86). The trial compared usual care (assigning care coordinators to PLWD after hospital discharge) to usual care plus proactive outreach, which assigned care coordinators to PLWD if they or their caregivers reported difficulty with care coordination on a telephone survey. Participants were followed for the combined outcome of emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization.
resultsAmong the 385 PLWD in the trial, the mean age was 82.6 years (SD 6.9), and 56.4% were female. Overall, participants had had a mean of 14.9 ambulatory visits to 8.9 different providers the previous year. The acceptance rate of care management was higher in the control group (73.7%) than in the intervention group (38.0%). Care coordinators were ultimately assigned to 14 of 192 PLWD in the control group (7.3%) and 19 of 193 PLWD in the intervention group (9.8%). The intention-to-treat analysis (N = 385) found a trend toward fewer ED visits in the intervention group (0.14 ED visits per 100 person-days alive vs. 0.18 ED visits per 100 person-days alive, p = 0.07) but no difference in the combined outcome of ED visit or hospitalization (p = 0.71).
conclusionAlthough the particular intervention we tested was not more effective than usual care, this trial is novel in that it used highly fragmented care as an inclusion criterion and shows that more work is needed to address fragmented care among PLWD.
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.