ArticleBMJ open2025
Identification of core outcomes for quality in routine care provided to people living with dementia in Australia: a multilevel modified Delphi consensus study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo co-design a core outcome set with people living with dementia and other stakeholders that can be used to measure the quality of dementia care in home care and residential settings.
designMultilevel modified Delphi consensus study. A priori consensus threshold of 70% was used to include or exclude outcomes.
settingRoutine dementia care provided through home care and residential aged care facilities in Australia.
participantsA stakeholder panel comprising people living with dementia, formal and family/informal carers of people living with dementia, advocates, policy experts, allied-health professionals, nurses and professionals working in the aged care industry. Round 1 included 10 panellists; subsequent rounds extended the number of participants to 24.
resultsSeven outcome domains (Death, Physiological and clinical, Functional, Life impact, Resources, Adverse events and Education), encompassing 105 individual outcomes were considered by the panel over four rounds.The 105 outcomes were distilled to 16 outcomes identified as important in home care and 15 in residential aged care. In both settings, nine outcomes (Dignity, Advanced care planning, Meaningful activities, Feeling safe and secure, Emotional wellbeing, Quality of Life, Resource utilisation, Safety incidents and Dementia-specific qualifications for care staff) were considered important.Additionally, seven outcomes in the home care setting (Behavioural symptoms of dementia, Diagnosis of dementia, Hygiene, Importance of Relationships, Quality of carer and family lives, Dementia care navigation and Opportunities for unpaid carers) and six outcomes in the residential aged care setting (Neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia, Pain, Hygiene and comfort, Medication safety, Staff carer morale and Adverse effects) were classified as important.
conclusionsThe outcomes identified during this modified Delphi consensus study provide a promising basis for the development of a meaningful, practical and measurable core outcome set that could be used in dementia care settings to improve the quality of routine care provided to people living with dementia.
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.