ArticleJournal of geriatric emergency medicine2024
Designing a Best Possible Caregiver History to Facilitate Disposition Planning for Older Adults in Emergency Departments.
Article in Journal of geriatric emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disposition at Equipoise: A Qualitative Study of Emergency Physicians' Decision-Making About Hospitalizing People With Dementia.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Feasibility and Acceptability of Engaging Care Partners of Persons Living With Dementia With Electronic Outreach for Deprescribing.The Gerontologist · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Detailed information about caregivers is crucial for planning disposition from emergency departments (EDs), but it is unclear what specific information is useful for ED clinicians and how that information should be presented. Methods: We used a Design Thinking approach to develop a standardized format-which we call a "Best Possible Caregiver History" (BPCH)-for displaying useful caregiver information to ED clinicians. The key steps of this approach are needfinding, followed by iterative cycles of ideation, rapid prototyping, and testing. For needfinding, we used semi-structured interviews of four ED clinicians on current practices for discovering and documenting caregiver information. For ideation and prototyping, we used rapid qualitative analysis to identify themes and used them as design constraints informing low-fidelity prototyping of the BPCH. For testing, we sought user feedback in interprofessional focus groups of ED social workers, nurses, therapists, and physicians. Focus group feedback was then analyzed to inform the design of subsequent prototypes, which were iteratively presented to subsequent focus groups five times. Results: Initial needfinding interviews found that caregiver information is gathered but often dispersed throughout the medical record, collected redundantly, and difficult to find and interpret. A structured and accessible shared note such as a BPCH would be useful. In focus groups, several design constraints for the BPCH emerged: caregiving data must include details about transportation, power of attorney, and home environment to be relevant for disposition, comprehensive, paired with functional assessments, and systematically presented. The BPCH does not require detail about persons or services helping with instrumental activities like shopping or banking. After five iterations, ED clinicians described the BPCH as useful. Conclusion: We illustrate how Design Thinking can help rapidly develop a novel format for displaying details about caregivers that could facilitate safer disposition from the ED. The BPCH embodies what ED clinicians at our institution consider clinically relevant for their practice. Further research is needed to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and generalizability of this intervention.
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.