Home › Research › End-of-life care
Can Persons with Dementia Meaningfully Participate in Advance Care Planning Discussions? A Mixed-Methods Study of SPIRIT
Song MK, Ward SE, Hepburn K, Paul S, Kim H, Shah RC, Morhardt DJ, Medders L et al.. Journal of palliative medicine, 2019-08-02
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
All 23 were able to articulate their end-of-life wishes very or somewhat coherently during the SPIRIT session; of those, 14 PWDs had moderate dementia. While decision-making capacity was higher in PWDs who articulated their wishes very coherently, MoCA scores did not differ by articulation levels. PWDs and surrogates perceived SPIRIT as beneficial, but the preparedness outcomes did not change pre-post. SPIRIT engaged PWDs and surrogates in meaningful ACP discussions, but requires testing of efficacy and long-term outcomes.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Song, M. K., Ward, S. E., Hepburn, K., Paul, S., Kim, H., Shah, R. C., et al. (2019). Can Persons with Dementia Meaningfully Participate in Advance Care Planning Discussions? A Mixed-Methods Study of SPIRIT. Journal of palliative medicine. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2019.0088
Vancouver
Song MK, Ward SE, Hepburn K, Paul S, Kim H, Shah RC, et al. Can Persons with Dementia Meaningfully Participate in Advance Care Planning Discussions? A Mixed-Methods Study of SPIRIT. Journal of palliative medicine. 2019. doi:10.1089/jpm.2019.0088. PMID: 31373868.
BibTeX
@article{song2019-31373868,
author = {Song, M. K. and Ward, S. E. and Hepburn, K. and Paul, S. and Kim, H. and Shah, R. C. and Morhardt, D. J. and Medders, L. and others},
title = {{Can Persons with Dementia Meaningfully Participate in Advance Care Planning Discussions? A Mixed-Methods Study of SPIRIT}},
journal = {Journal of palliative medicine},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1089/jpm.2019.0088},
pmid = {31373868},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2019.0088}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- All 23 were able to articulate their end-of-life wishes very or somewhat coherently during the SPIRIT session; of those, 14 PWDs had moderate dementia.
- While decision-making capacity was higher in PWDs who articulated their wishes very coherently, MoCA scores did not differ by articulation levels.
- PWDs and surrogates perceived SPIRIT as beneficial, but the preparedness outcomes did not change pre-post.
- SPIRIT engaged PWDs and surrogates in meaningful ACP discussions, but requires testing of efficacy and long-term outcomes.
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 71/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size and effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 71 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of palliative medicine) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomized controlled trial |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomized / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomized (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31373868) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 41 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 71 out of 100. |
| Total | 71 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in End-of-life care
Also tagged “care”
995 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 995 tagged studies.