ArticleBMJ open2026
Continence care quality from the perspective of older adults in long-term care or in receipt of home care: a scoping review.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the state of the research literature addressing what is known about the quality of continence care from the perspective of older adults in long-term care or in receipt of home care.
designScoping review of the literature according to the Joanna Briggs Institute method, reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines.
resultsWe identified 14 articles from the academic literature. Sources originated from the USA (7), Australia (4), Canada (2) and 1 from Italy. Long-term care residents were the focus of 12 of the articles. Older adults reported limited access and information regarding continence care and services and variable abilities of care staff to deliver care. Older adults wanted to be actively involved in decisions about their care, preserve their autonomy and independence and wanted care to enhance their well-being.
conclusionsStudies examining the perspectives of older adults regarding the quality of their continence care are few. Older adults value person-centredness, expert advice regarding their condition, allowing preservation of self-determination and independence where possible. Older people value meaningful relationships with empathetic care providers. There remains a need for education of care providers in continence care and for policies and practices to support continence in a dignity-preserving framework. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/bprq9/).
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.