ArticleBMJ open2026
Evidence on the preparedness and practice needs of the home care workforce to support older LGBTQ+ people: a rapid review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOlder people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer or other marginalised sexualities and gender identities (LGBTQ+) still face significant barriers and inequalities when accessing adult social care services. Little is known about the preparedness of the care workforce to support older LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly within home care services. While a few previous reviews have examined the perspectives of older LGBTQ+ people on the preparedness of the home care workforce, none have included the perspectives of the workforce itself or compared both perspectives. This is a protocol for a rapid review that aims to explore what is known about the preparedness and practice needs of the home care workforce to support older LGBTQ+ people, with a particular focus on workforce perspectives. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A rapid review method was selected to expedite the review process to support further study development and dissemination. Two electronic databases, SCOPUS and Web of Science, will be searched, as well as six subject-specific databases, including Social Care Institute for Excellence, Skills for Care, Social Care Wales, Homecare Association, Stonewall UK, LGBT Foundation UK and SAGE US. There are no search date restrictions. Study quality will be assessed using the Quality Assessment with Diverse Studies tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations considerations will be used to consider certainty of evidence. Data will be synthesised using narrative synthesis, including a descriptive summary of included studies and their methodological quality. All preferred reporting items for review protocols have been included, as recorded by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for the protocol and review. Manuscripts for the protocol and completed review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, and findings will be shared in webinars for the home care workforce and at academic conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251038242.
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.