ReviewHealth services insights2025
Barriers and Facilitators to Formal Dementia Care Use Among UK South Asians: A Systematic Review.
Review in Health services insights, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This qualitative systematic review aims to identify, analyse and discuss barriers and facilitators to formal dementia services for South Asians in the UK with dementia. South Asian individuals in the UK are more likely to face a dementia diagnosis than the White British demographic; a trend which is expected to grow over the following decades. Despite this greater need for support, the UK South Asian demographic is less likely to access formal dementia services. Methods: MODEM, Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL via EBSCO, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched (22nd July 2025) using a SPIDER search strategy and included studies' bibliographies were checked, in addition to existing review literature. Data on included studies was extracted using an adapted Cochrane Library data collection form and quality assessed using the JBI critical appraisal instrument for qualitative research. Themes were extracted and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Ten articles were found to meet the inclusion criteria and therefore included in this systematic review. While this review is framed as considering UK South Asians, data was only available from Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani individuals. However, much literature which claims 'South Asian' only defines South Asia as consisting of these three countries. Therefore, calling this paper a review of the 'South Asian' demographic allows us to critique this homogenisation. Results: Five main themes were identified: Lack of Knowledge, Racism/Culturally Inappropriate Care, Stigma, a Familial Duty of Care and Service Delivery. There was disagreement in the literature regarding the existence of stigma. Previously unrecognised interrelations between these themes were identified, as a lack of knowledge had a potentially causal effect on both stigma and a familial duty of care. Conclusion: The results indicate a need for review of current policy and practice, however further research is needed, particularly with regard to facilitators, which lacked data in comparison to barriers.
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.