Contextualizing the findings of a systematic review on patient and carer experiences of dementia diagnosis and treatment: A qualitative study

Health Expectations

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 740-753

  Bunn, Frances ^a   Sworn, Katie ^b   Brayne, Carol ^c   Iliffe, Steve ^d   Robinson, Louise ^e   Goodman, Claire ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^d ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^e NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dementia; Public participation; Qualitative; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

CAREGIVER; DEMENTIA; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; LITERATURE; MALE; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

CAREGIVERS; DEMENTIA; ENGLAND; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84942295871     PISSN: 13696513     EISSN: 13697625     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/hex.12162     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Chalmers I. Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: the role of rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2003; 589: 22-40.
2. Mulrow CD. Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ, 1994; 309: 597-599.
3. Sheldon TA. Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2005; 10(Suppl 1): 1-5.
4. Bastion H. The power of sharing knowledge: consumer participation in the Cochrane Collaboration, 1994. Available at: http://consumerscochraneorg/sites/consumerscochraneorg/files/BastianPowerofSharingKnowledge_1994pdf, accessed 3 May 2012 [Internet].
5. Kreis J, Puhan MA, Schünemann HJ, Dickersin K. Consumer involvement in systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness research. Health Expectations, 2012; 16: 323-337.
6. SCIE. Collectionn of Examples of Service User and Carer Participation in Systematic Reviews. Social Care Institute for Excellence, 2007. Available at: http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/researchresources/rr02.pdf. accessed 3 May 2012.
7. Goodman C, Evans C, Wilcock J et al. End of life care for community dwelling older people with dementia: an integrated review. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 2010; 25: 329-337.
8. Brussoni M, Towner E, Hayes M. Evidence into practice: combining the art and science of injury prevention. Injury Prevention, 2006; 12: 373-377.
9. Ciliska D, Hayward S, Dobbins M, Brunton G, Underwood J. Transferring public-health nursing research to health-system planning: assessing the relevance and accessibility of systematic reviews. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 1999; 31: 23-36.
10. Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A, Denis JL, Golden-Biddle K, Ferlie E. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2005; 10(Suppl 1): 35-48.
11. Bunn F, Goodman C, Sworn K et al. Psychosocial factors that shape patient and carer experiences of dementia diagnosis and treatment: a systematic review of qualitative studies. PLoS Medicine, 2012; 9: e1001331.
12. DH. Living Well with Dementia - the National Dementia Strategy Joint Commissioning Framework for Dementia. London: Department of Health, 2009.
13. Morgan DL. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc, 1997.
14. Rees R, Oliver S. Stakeholder perspectives and participation in reviews. In: Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J (eds) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. London: Sage, 2012.
15. Pawson R, Boaz A, Grayson L, Long A, Barnes C. Types and Quality of Knowledge in Social Care. London: Social Care Institute for Excellence (Knowledge Review 3), 2003.
16. Robinson L, Hutchings D, Corner L et al. A systematic literature review of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent wandering in dementia and evaluation of the ethical implications and acceptability of their use. Health Technology Assessment, 2006; 10: iii, ix-108.
17. Hubbard G, Downs MG, Tester S. Including older people with dementia in research: challenges and strategies. Aging & Mental Health, 2003; 7: 351-362.
18. Bartlett H, Martin W. Ethical issues in dementia care research. In: Wilkinson H (ed) The Perspective of People with Dementia. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2002.
19. Greenwood N, Mackenzie A. Informal caring for stroke survivors: meta-ethnographic review of qualitative literature. Maturitas, 2010; 66: 268-276.
20. Lokk J. Caregiver strain in Parkinson's disease and the impact of disease duration. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 2008; 44: 39.
21. Ory MG, Hoffman RR, Yee JL, Tennstedt S, Schulz R. Prevalence and impact of caregiving: a detailed comparison between dementia and nondementia caregivers. The Gerontologist, 1999; 39: 177-186.
22. Gaugler JE, Kane RL, Kane RA, Newcomer R. Unmet care needs and key outcomes in dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2005; 53: 2098-2105.
23. Covinsky KE, Newcomer R, Fox P et al. Patient and caregiver characteristics associated with depression in caregivers of patients with dementia. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2003; 18: 1006-1014.
24. Owen S. The practical, methodological and ethical dilemmas of conducting focus groups with vulnerable clients. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2001; 36: 652-658.
25. Iliffe S, Curry L, Kharicha K et al. Developing a Dementia Research Registry: a descriptive case study from North Thames DeNDRoN and the EVIDEM programme. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2011; 11: 9.
26. Goodman C, Mathie E, Cowe M et al. Talking about living and dying with the oldest old: public involvement in a study on end of life care in care homes. BMC Palliative Care, 2011; 10: 20.
27. Bunn F, Sworn K. Strategies to promote the impact of systematic reviews on healthcare policy. Evidence & Policy, 2011; 7: 403-429.