Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41469578›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2025

Cultural adaptation of the serious illness conversation guide for caregivers of persons with dementia in Singapore.

Alston Ng, Vignesh Sivasamy, Shirlyn Hui Shan Neo

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07733973 (Evaluating the Effectiveness, Acceptability and Feasibility of a Communication and Care Coordinator), which is not on this 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.

NCT07733973 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Evaluating the Effectiveness, Acceptability and Feasibility of a Communication and Care Coordinator (CCC) Model in Facilitating Serious Illness Communication (SIC) and Care in Patients With Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Cancer Centre, SingaporeRan2026 to 2029Enrolled560ConditionsCancerArmsCCC Intervention
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.

Alston NgDivision of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, 30 Hospital Boulevard, Singapore, 168583, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-0735-9595
Vignesh SivasamyDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5218-5997
Shirlyn Hui Shan NeoDivision of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, 30 Hospital Boulevard, Singapore, 168583, Singapore. shirlyn.neo.h.s@singhealth.com.sg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2811-1661

Funding

Lien Centre for Palliative Care LCPC-EX22-0001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGoals-of-care (GOC) discussions are often delayed or uninitiated for people with dementia, potentially contributing to inappropriate end-of-life treatment. The Serious Illness Conversation Guide (SICG) facilitates structured GOC discussions about patient values and care preferences, but a dementia-specific Guide adapted to the Asian cultural context has yet to be developed. This study aimed to adapt and iteratively revise the SICG-C, and assess its acceptability among caregivers of people with dementia.

methodsWe adapted the SICG for caregivers of people with dementia in Singapore using a three-phase, approach. Phase 1 involved adapting the patient-facing SICG to caregiver-facing language (version 1). In Phase 2, we iteratively tested the guide with 6 and 13 caregivers in 2 rounds of interviews to derive the final version of the Guide. In Phase 3, 50 caregivers rated each SICG-C item from Versions 1 and 3 using a structured questionnaire, with presentation order alternated to minimise order effects.

resultsSixty-nine caregivers were recruited in this study. Qualitative interviews revealed that caregivers valued professionalism and reassurance from clinicians, while also emphasising their own experiential knowledge as distinct from clinical expertise. Many struggled to articulate their loved ones' priorities due to cognitive decline and the absence of prior discussions, often expressing uncertainty about whether their assumptions reflected what their loved ones would have wanted. Caregivers were sensitive to language implying poor prognosis and preferred phrasing that conveyed continuity of care and partnership. None of the caregivers had been informed by their loved ones of their goals and priorities, reaffirming the value of the SICG-C. In the final survey (n = 50), caregivers showed a strong preference for Version 3 over Version 1, with 21 of 22 items rated significantly higher (all p<0.001). The final SICG-C was rated highly acceptable.

conclusionThe SICG-C enables clinicians to initiate timely, values-based GOC discussions with caregivers of people with dementia. Its structured, sensitive language addresses caregiver concerns and may be used to support proactive care planning in dementia. Further research is needed to evaluate implementation in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

CaregiversCommunicationDementiaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSingaporeSurveys and QuestionnairesCommunicationDementiaGoals of careSerious illness careValues and preferences

Identifiers

PMID41469578
PMCPMC12755006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.