Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40539035›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in dementia2025

Meaningful inclusion of people with dementia in interview research: adopting the "intentional stance".

Emma O'Shea, Suzanne Timmons, Kate Irving

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in dementia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Emma O'SheaCentre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Suzanne TimmonsCentre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Kate IrvingSchool of Nursing, Psychotherapy and Community Health, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Engaging people living with dementia in interview research presents unique ethical, methodological, and practical challenges. In recent years there is an increased recognition of the importance and value of meaningfully including people with dementia in research, and of the epistemic injustice of systematic exclusion. While there are a growing number of research papers suggesting strategies for fostering ethical and meaningful inclusion, this area is still very much in development, theoretically and methodologically. This paper outlines how a theoretical perspective on selfhood in dementia, which incorporates the concept of the "Intentional Stance" (as per Sabat), may be a useful means of reaching people with dementia in a meaningful way via open, curious and personhood-supporting interactions. Embodying the "intentional stance" refers to operating under the assumption that all behavior and interactions do have meaning(s), even if it is not immediately or intuitively evident to the researcher what the meaning(s) are. Here, we draw on excerpts from an interview I conducted with a person living with dementia about his experiences of and perspectives on respite and day services, using the intentional stance, in conjunction with a range of other strategies for maximizing reciprocal communication. The analysis highlights instances where the intentional stance was central to connecting with the person, and temporarily entering their lifeworld. Adopting this stance is a means of reducing the epistemic injustice that people with dementia have faced, through longstanding omission and exclusion from research, and from social spheres more broadly.

Indexed as

dementiaintentional stanceinterview researchperson-centeredsemiotic status

Identifiers

PMID40539035
PMCPMC12176766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.