ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Measures of healthcare decision-making ability in cognitive aging: a scoping review from the Advancing Reliable Measurement in Cognitive Aging and Decision-Making Ability (ARMCADA) research initiative.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- A scoping review of emotion and non-cognitive measures of decision-making ability in older adults by the ARMCADA study.Frontiers in public health · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Declines in decision-making (DM) ability are often observed with increasing age and pose significant risk for negative health, financial, and functional outcomes. The Advancing Reliable Measurement in Cognitive Aging and Decision-making Ability (ARMCADA) research initiative aims to improve measurement of DM ability in aging to facilitate early detection of cognitive and functional decline. This scoping review summarizes the extant literature on DM measures in aging, focusing specifically on measures relevant to healthcare decision-making (HCDM). Methods: We identified articles published between 2018 and 2023 using keywords related to DM abilities in aging populations. Titles and abstracts were first reviewed by two trained reviewers, followed by full-text review and extraction. Results of the current scoping review are reported in adherence to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Results: The scoping review identified 16,286 articles across multiple domains of decision-making, 705 of which met criteria for extraction, and 246 of which were related to healthcare decision-making. There were 86 unique measures across these articles, and 18 of these measures directly targeted decision-making ability. Most measures were administered to clinical groups in English and in-person with a trained examiner. Measures of healthcare DM ability tended to consist of semi-structured interviews or performance-based items, though there were also several self-report measures. Discussion: The most commonly used measures to assess HCDM ability require trained administration of a semi-structured interview to assess ability to reason about health-related scenarios and are often time-intensive. Creation of a streamlined, standardized measure to assess HCDM ability will benefit both research and clinical care for the aging population.
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.