Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41689219›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment in Prison (DECISION) care pathway and training package: protocol for a realist-informed mixed-methods feasibility study.

Katrina Forsyth, Deborah Buck, Kate Stalker, Victoria Allgar, Jennifer Shaw, Ryan Cowley-Sharp, Rachael Hunter, Charlotte Lennox, Adam O'Neill, Catherine Robinson and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

12 authors.

Katrina ForsythSocial Care and Society, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9980-9464
Deborah BuckSocial Care and Society, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Deborah.Buck@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2271-6400
Kate StalkerSocial Care and Society, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Victoria AllgarUniversity of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5228-2623
Jennifer ShawDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Ryan Cowley-SharpLancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.
Rachael HunterResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7447-8934
Charlotte LennoxDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9014-9965
Adam O'NeillDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Catherine RobinsonSocial Care and Society, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Stuart WareRestore Support Network, Exeter, UK.
Louise RobinsonDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6455-1360

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecent research indicates that around 8% of older people living in prison have signs or symptoms of dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI), yet the care they receive is not equivalent to care in the community and this means their needs may not be met. We co-developed an intervention specifically for older people living in prison with dementia/MCI (Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment in prison care pathway and training package-DECISION). To date, this has not been implemented or evaluated. This paper presents our protocol for a study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of DECISION.

methodsThis is a non-randomised, realist-informed mixed-methods feasibility study with integrated process evaluation, which will take place in two prisons in England. The intervention was codeveloped with experts with lived experience. Participants will include older people living in prison, staff working in prison and peer supporters. We will assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention (eg, numbers eligible; rates of recruitment and retention), and the evaluation design (eg, completion rates of standardised outcome measures). Methods will include semistructured, realist-informed interviews; an audit to assess implementation fidelity; focused ethnography; training questionnaires; and collection of resource use data. We will refine the DECISION programme theory using realist-informed methods to examine and refine how contexts and mechanisms interact to produce the intervention's outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received a favourable ethical opinion from the Wales REC 3 Research Ethics Committee in January 2025 (reference number 24/WA/0323). HMPPS National Research Committee approval was also granted in January 2025 (reference number 2024-1451). Findings will be disseminated through a range of avenues, including stakeholder engagement events, open-access papers, conference presentations, evidence briefings for commissioners, providers and practitioners, and newsletters for service users.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionDementiaPrisonersPrisonsAgedEnglandFeasibility StudiesHealth Services for PrisonersHumansResearch DesignDementiaFeasibility StudiesPrisons

Identifiers

PMID41689219
PMCPMC12911847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.