Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40713059›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Developing service models for adult palliative and end of life care for people with a learning disability (The DAPPLE Project): protocol for a mixed-method study.

Irene Tuffrey-Wijne, Elizabeth Tilley, Freya Tyrer, Zoebia Islam, Erica Borgstrom, Joanne Jordan, Gyles Glover, Louise Wallace, Christina Roberts, Jo Giles and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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

13 authors.

Irene Tuffrey-WijneFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK I.Tuffrey-Wijne@kingston.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7288-9529
Elizabeth TilleySchool of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Freya TyrerLeicester Real World Evidence Unit, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Zoebia IslamLOROS, Hospice Care for Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Erica BorgstromSchool of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1009-2928
Joanne JordanSchool of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Gyles GloverUniversity of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Louise WallaceSchool of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Christina RobertsFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6226-0519
Jo GilesFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK.
Richard Keagan-BullFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK.
Amanda CresswellFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK.
Rebecca Anderson-KittowFaculty of Health, Science, Social Care and Education, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeople with a learning disability face significant health and mortality inequalities as well as wider systemic inequities. Challenges in palliative and end of life care (PEOLC) include communication difficulties, lack of involvement in decision-making and multimorbidity. Early identification of PEOLC needs is challenging, impacting timely care planning. The study aims to (1) understand barriers and enablers to providing high-quality, accessible PEOLC for people with a learning disability, and identify effective service delivery models and interventions and (2) improve PEOLC quality and accessibility by developing robust guidance for health and social care services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods study guided by the NHS England 2021 Ambitions Framework and adopting the Social Model of Disability. There are four workstreams: (1) a retrospective cohort analysis of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink; (2) a rapid scoping review; (3) field work in four study sites across England, involving (a) interviews with senior leaders and commissioners (n=up to 16) and informal stakeholder engagement conversations; (b) ethnographic case studies with people with a learning disability at the end of life (n=up to 20) and retrospective case reviews of people with a learning disability who have died (n=up to 40), using family and staff interviews and (c) development and piloting of methods for enabling systematic identification of PEOLC need, using experience-based co-design and (4) patient and public involvement (PPI) activities and a co-production group of 10 people with a learning disability to support data analysis and outputs. Data will be analysed using adapted framework analysis methodology. This is an inclusive, co-produced study with significant involvement of advisors and researchers with a learning disability as part of the study team. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained for workstreams 1, 3a and 3b. Significant attention has been paid to ensuring informed consent, making adjustments for capacity. Accessible information and consent forms will be used, involving consultees and adhering to the Mental Capacity Act for participants who lack capacity. Data security will follow General Data Protection Regulation rules. Dissemination will include patient exemplars, guidance and various resources, engaging stakeholders through multiple formats. STUDY REGISTRATION: researchregistry10500.

Indexed as

Learning DisabilitiesPalliative CareTerminal CareAdultEnglandHumansResearch DesignRetrospective StudiesHealth EquityHealth Services AccessibilityPALLIATIVE CAREPerson-Centered CareQuality Improvement

Identifiers

PMID40713059
PMCPMC12306286

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.