Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42031480›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Methodologies and methods for the development, evaluation and implementation of psychosocial interventions for dementia: protocol for a scoping review.

Federica D'Andrea, Sara Laureen Bartels, Marine Markaryan, Patricia Masterson-Algar, Andrea Nakakawa Bernal, Simone R De Bruin, Ilaria Chirico, Aisling Flynn, Lesley Garcia, Doris Gebhard and 9 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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

19 authors.

Federica D'Andrea *The Geller Institute of Ageing and Memory, School of Medicine and Biosciences, University of West London, London, UK.
Sara Laureen Bartels *Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology and Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands sara.bartels@ki.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2626-2557
Marine MarkaryanDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology and Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Patricia Masterson-AlgarSchool of Health Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6344-1346
Andrea Nakakawa BernalDepartment of Design, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Simone R De BruinDepartment of Health and Social Care, Research Group Living Well with Dementia, Windesheim University of Applied Sciences, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Ilaria ChiricoDepartment of Human Sciences for Education 'Riccardo Massa', University of Milano, Bicocca, Italy.
Aisling FlynnDepartment of Rehabilitation and Sports Science, Bournemouth University, Poole, UK.
Lesley GarciaSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Doris GebhardDepartment of Health and Sport Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munchen, Germany.
Melanie HandleyCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8037-5042
Niels JanssenDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology and Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Mental Health and Neuroscience Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Martina RoesWitten Site, German Centre for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Bonn, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4531-8584
Nathan StephensThe Association for Dementia Studies, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK.
Gwen TeesingAlzheimer Nederland, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Lieve Van den BlockDepartment of Family Medicine and Chronic Care, VUB-UGent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Karen WindleFaculty of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine, UK.
Esme Moniz-CookFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Hull, Hull, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7232-4632
Maud GraffDepartment of Rehabilitation, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4361-4291

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionResearch on psychosocial interventions for dementia demonstrates increased rigour and robustness. However, if we are to influence practice, beyond results from randomised controlled trials, a variety of types and sources of evidence is needed. The Medical Research Council (MRC) framework offers a valuable guide for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions, to facilitate integration of research into practice. There is limited knowledge of how researchers design, evaluate and implement psychosocial intervention studies in dementia, using the MRC framework. This scoping review aims to: (1) identify the methodological and methods trends, use and gaps in the development, evaluation and implementation of psychosocial interventions for dementia, and (2) determine if and how the MRC six core elements were considered and applied in studies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Six databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library) will be searched for studies published from 2015 (when MRC process guidance was published) to 2025. Identified deduplicated citations will be imported into Covidence software, where up to 40% of title/abstracts will be double screened by independent reviewers. ASReview will be used to rank articles by relevance, with a stopping criterion of 250 consecutive irrelevant articles. Full texts will be reviewed by a single reviewer and those excluded will be checked by a second reviewer. Data extraction will include study aim/objective (ie, to develop/adapt; test feasibility/pilot; evaluate; implement); methodology and methods applied; information on which MRC six core elements were considered (yes/no), and if so, how they were addressed (ie, qualitative details). A narrative synthesis, alongside graphical representations (eg, table/bar charts/histograms), will be used to synthesise findings on methodologies and methods mapped onto the MRC framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This secondary analysis scoping review does not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication(s), seminars, webinars, conferences, postgraduate dementia programmes, blogs, commissioner briefings and social media. The findings will provide a state-of-the-art overview of current practices; advance methods/methodology such as informing a Delphi consensus study on appropriate research approaches; and guide researchers in application of the MRC framework to widen the scope of dementia care evidence for practice improvements. REGISTRATION: Submitted to Open Science Framework https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/S56NQ.

Indexed as

DementiaPsychosocial InterventionHumansResearch DesignScoping Reviews as TopicDementiaFeasibility StudiesImplementation ScienceMethodsPsychosocial InterventionReview

Identifiers

PMID42031480
PMCPMC13110686

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.