ArticleAge and ageing2026
Priorities for medication management information resources for people with dementia and carers: a community-driven approach using a modified Delphi method.
Article in Age and ageing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManaging medications safely can be challenging for people with dementia and carers living in the community and medication errors can be a source of preventable harm. Resources to support people in medication management must address their information needs and prioritise these alongside those of broader stakeholders.
objectiveWe aimed to generate content statements for inclusion in tailored medication management literacy resources for people with dementia and carers. DESIGN AND
methodsUsing a community-based participatory research approach, we established a Medication Management Guidance Partnership: collaboration between the research team, research advisory group, and partner organisations. A mixed-method approach generated 49 statements (Phase 1) then we conducted an online modified Delphi process to gain consensus (Rounds 1 and 2) and prioritise statement order (Round 3) for inclusion in resources (Phase 2). Primary criterion for consensus required ≥80% of participants rating statements as important (≥7 on 9-point Likert-type scale). Secondary criteria assessed response variability, and statements were required to meet all criteria for inclusion.
resultsPeople with dementia (n = 5), carers (n = 5), healthcare professionals and/or national consumer organisation representatives (n = 13) reached consensus on 44 statements across six information domains. 'Information about decision-making' was ranked highest, followed by 'general question prompts', 'information about common medications', 'addressing complexities,' 'getting guidance in different languages' and 'additional supports.'
conclusionOur 'menu' of statements about medication management priorities, endorsed by end-users, can be used to guide development of resources to improve medication management and potentially reduce medication-related harm in this population.
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.