ArticleFrontiers in dementia2025
Informed consent in dementia research: how Public Involvement can contribute to addressing "old" and "new" challenges.
Article in Frontiers in dementia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Understanding the Unique Ethical Challenges in Randomized Controlled Trials of Delirium Interventions for Older Adults: A Rapid Review.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness of a community-based dementia support model: evidence from a real-world economic evaluation.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Advance Research Directives and Supported Consent in Dementia Research.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Article
- Expectations for a co-designed virtual immersive program for older adults with dementia in long-term care: a qualitative study with residents, family, and staff.Frontiers in dementia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Informed consent is a critical ethical requirement in research, ensuring the protection of participants' rights and promoting their wellbeing and autonomy. In dementia research, this process becomes particularly complex due to cognitive impairments and fluctuating capacity. While substantial work has been done to address these challenges, much of the literature on informed consent in dementia research has been shaped by the perspectives of researchers and healthcare professionals, with less focus on those with lived experience. This paper provides an overview of the perspectives of people with dementia and their carers resulting from Public Involvement activities organized by Alzheimer Europe. It builds on Alzheimer Europe's previous work with the European Working Group of People with Dementia and draws on discussions held during a face-to-face meeting about Participant Informed Consent forms and processes used in two specific European projects. We highlight views and key concerns raised by people with lived experience regarding the informed consent process, including barriers and facilitators. In addition to ensuring understandability, the discussions emphasized the importance of promoting respect and autonomy, ensuring that the values and interests of people with lived experience remain central throughout the research process. This paper contributes to the ongoing dialogue on improving informed consent practices in dementia research, highlighting the need for continuous involvement and the inclusion of people with lived experience in shaping consent practices to address both old and emerging challenges (i.e., new types of research such as artificial intelligence and data sharing/re-use) in dementia research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.