Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41875105›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Home over institution? New insights on older adults' care preferences from a mixed-methods study in France.

Anaïs Cheneau, Jonathan Sicsic, Thomas Rapp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

3 authors.

Anaïs CheneauLIRAES and Chaire AgingUP!, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0379-8049
Jonathan SicsicLIRAES and Chaire AgingUP!, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Thomas RappLIRAES and Chaire AgingUP!, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As populations age, long-term care policies must balance individual preferences with financial constraints. The prevailing "aging in place" policy in France assumes that citizens overwhelmingly prefer home care over nursing homes. However, little is known about people's preferences towards long-term care options before disability occurs. We elicit preferences among community-dwelling adults over 60 using a mixed-method approach: qualitative interviews and a two-stage D-efficient discrete choice experiment. In each task, respondents chose between two hypothetical nursing homes varying in professional care quality, living environment, out-of-pocket (OOP) cost, and proximity, then decided whether to receive care in this nursing home or remain at home. A sample of 2,886 French adults over 60 completed the survey in 2024. We used random-effect conditional logit and latent class logit models to investigate trade-offs and preference heterogeneity. While a majority (54%) consistently favored home-care, 37% shifted their decision in response to improved nursing home characteristics. Professional care quality and living environment influenced choices as strongly as OOP cost, while proximity plays a secondary role. Strengthening staffing and training, upgrading equipment and the conviviality of shared spaces, and containing OOP costs are direct levers to raise the acceptability of nursing home care.

Indexed as

Home Care ServicesNursing HomesPatient PreferenceAgedAged, 80 and overAging in PlaceChoice BehaviorFemaleFranceHumansLong-Term CareMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41875105
PMCPMC13012468

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.