ArticleScandinavian journal of caring sciences2026
Advance Care Planning Among People With Dementia in the Netherlands: Insights From an Exploratory Survey of Health Care Professional Perspectives.
Article in Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) for patients with dementia has gained increasing attention in recent years, recognizing the importance of aligning future care with the values and preferences of patients with progressive cognitive decline. Health care professionals (HCPs) play an important role in facilitating ACP. However, little is known about the day-to-day implementation of ACP in this group.
aimThis study therefore aims to gain insights into how HCPs experience discussing frequency, importance, and difficulty of ACP topics with patients with dementia. Additionally, we investigated the determinants of frequency, importance, and difficulty of discussing ACP topics.
methodsA cross-sectional survey study, where HCPs involved in dementia care in the Netherlands were invited for an online survey. A survey covering 11 topics related to ACP, in which HCPs indicate the importance, frequency, and difficulty of each topic. The survey invitation was sent to hospitals, nursing homes, and dementia care networks by email, flyers at care facilities with QR code, and social media. Data were collected between May 2022 and July 2022.
resultsIn total, 189 HCPs competed the surveys (median 48 years, range: 19-70). The majority of respondents were female (91.0%), had a high educational level (63.5%), and worked parttime (68.3%). Older HCPs experienced more difficulty discussing ACP topics. HCPs scored almost all ACP topics as high importance. Preferred place of death and organ donation were the least discussed topics and were also considered less important than other topics (e.g., quality of life factors). The mean scores of perceived importance of all topics were higher than perceived frequency.
conclusionsHCPs assigned a high level of importance to almost all ACP topics and a low level of difficulty. Training for older HCPs and the utilization of tools/intervention in standard care could improve care or experiences of ACP.
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.