Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39281845›Full record

ArticleHRB open research2022

Developing consensus-based recommendations for the delivery of dementia services for the LGBTQIA+ community in the Republic of Ireland.

Megan H Oglesby, Sinéad M Hynes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HRB open research, 2022. 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

2 authors.

Megan H OglesbySchool of Health Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, H91TK33, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8772-5546
Sinéad M HynesSchool of Health Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, H91TK33, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-7355

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of older LGBTQIA+ adults is set to rise significantly in the coming years. The rising numbers sit together with the rise in the number of people in Ireland diagnosed with dementia. In Ireland, no dementia-specific services exist for people from the LGBTQIA+ community. The aim of this research was to 1) identify the future needs that older LGBTQIA+ people and their care partners living in Ireland have in relation to dementia care service delivery; and 2) develop consensus-based recommendations for dementia service provision in Ireland.

methodsA six-phase consensus process was used to develop the lists of needs and recommendations: 1) development; 2) national survey; 3) interviews with key stakeholders; 4) international review of best practice; 5) consensus meeting; 6) final member checking. Participants, aged over 50, were based in Ireland, identified as a member of the LGBTQIA+ community, or supported someone who is/was.

resultsResults are reported from the survey (n=49), individual interviews (n=8), and the consensus meeting (n=10). Participants have concerns related to identity management and suppression, creating an LGBTQIA+ affirmative ethos and workforce, and respect and safety. From the results and consensus process, a full list of ten prioritised needs and recommendations have been developed that focus specifically on dementia care in Ireland for the LGBTQIA+ community.

conclusionThe older LGBTQIA+ community has identified essential priorities for improving healthcare access and safety. These priorities need to be urgently implemented into clinical and dementia care services.

Indexed as

dementiahealthcare accesshealthcare recommendationsLGBTQIA+older adultspublic and patient involvement

Identifiers

PMID39281845
PMCPMC11401990

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.