ArticleThe Gerontologist2026
Identifying older adults' communication support needs and preferences: a scoping review of measurement instruments.
Article in The Gerontologist, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesCommunication changes in older adults affect independence, social participation, and quality of life. In aged care settings, timely identification of communication support needs and preferences is essential to upholding older people's rights and ensuring person-centered care, yet communication is not routinely assessed. This scoping review systematically identifies and describes instruments that measure communication support needs and preferences in older adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Embase alongside gray literature. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened against eligibility criteria using Covidence. Data on instrument context, content, and administration were extracted and synthesized using content analysis and the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health framework.
results26 publications describing 29 instruments were included. Instruments were typically condition-specific (e.g., dementia) or impairment-specific (e.g., hearing loss). Communication preferences and personal factors, such as cultural and linguistic background, were rarely considered, and only one instrument assessed both needs and preferences. While self-report instruments were often intended for completion by the older adult, only one offered a communication-accessible version (e.g., easy read text, larger font, visual aids). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: No existing instrument adequately measures communication support needs and preferences for use in aged care settings. A condition-agnostic instrument is needed that adopts a holistic, biopsychosocial perspective; accounts for the aged care environment; incorporates multiple perspectives; and is communication-accessible. Developing such a measure is a foundational step toward accurate, consistent, and timely identification of the communication needs of older adults in aged care.
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.