SynthesisJournal of advanced nursing2026
Views and Experiences of People With Dementia, Informal Caregivers and Professionals on Eating and Drinking Difficulties: A Qualitative Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Views and Experiences of People With Dementia, Informal Caregivers and Professionals on Eating and Drinking Difficulties: A Qualitative Systematic Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims to explore the views and experiences of people with dementia, informal caregivers and professionals regarding eating and drinking difficulties.
designA qualitative systematic review was conducted.
methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were used to conduct this systematic review. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research, and the data were thematically synthesised using Thomas and Harden's three-stage method. DATA SOURCES: Six electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO) were searched from their respective inception dates to August 2025 to identify relevant studies.
resultsThematic analysis of the 16 included studies identified four key themes: (1) Physiological and psychological changes in people with dementia and caregivers; (2) factors influencing eating and drinking in people with dementia; (3) needs and recommendations for people with dementia, informal caregivers and professionals; (4) selection of eating methods for end-stage people with dementia.
conclusionsEating and drinking difficulties affect the well-being of both patients and caregivers. A good dining environment improves mealtime pleasure but demands caregivers' time and energy. All parties emphasised the importance of effective communication. In end-stage dementia, professional assistance is crucial for enteral nutrition decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Collaboration among patients, caregivers and professionals is vital for creating tailored nutritional plans and improving mealtime environments, thereby enhancing nutritional intake. In advanced dementia, providers must provide balanced information on comfort feeding versus enteral nutrition to aid decision-making. IMPACT: What problems were addressed in this study? This study addressed the lack of a consolidated, tri-perspective understanding of eating and drinking difficulties in dementia care settings. What are the main findings? Four key themes were identified: physiological and psychological changes, influencing factors, stakeholder needs and end-of-life decision-making. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This will impact care practices for people with dementia and inform the training and support of informal caregivers and healthcare professionals.
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.