Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42740751›Full record

ArticleClinical and public health guidelines2025

The Values and Preferences of People Living With Motor Neurone Disease (MND): A Systematic Review Protocol.

Timothy Hugh Barker, Grace Holland, Camille Schubert, Danielle Pollock, Cindy Stern, Nipun Shrestha, Wojtek Wiercioch, Samer Karam, Steve Vucic, Jay Beasley-Hall and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and public health guidelines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

13 authors.

Timothy Hugh BarkerHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Grace HollandHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Camille SchubertAdelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0828-1612
Danielle PollockHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6604-0609
Cindy SternHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Nipun ShresthaHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Wojtek WierciochMichael G. DeGroote Cochrane Canada & McMaster GRADE Centres McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6576-1650
Samer KaramDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.
Steve VucicBrain and Nerve Research Centre, Concord Clinical School The University of Sydney Sydney Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8323-873X
Jay Beasley-HallUniversity Library, The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Lynne GilesSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Tracy MerlinAdelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.
Zachary MunnHealth Evidence Synthesis, Recommendations and Impact (HESRI), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the values and preferences of people with lived experience of motor neurone disease (MND), including those living with MND, caregivers and genetic carriers, regarding their health-related outcomes. Introduction: MND is a devastating neurodegenerative disease that significantly impacts those living with the disease, their caregivers, and their families. Understanding the values and preferences of those affected by MND is crucial for providing patient-centred care and developing trustworthy guidelines. Eligibility Criteria: Studies will be included if they report on the values and preferences of adults living with MND; caregivers and families of those diagnosed with MND; clinicians as a proxy for adults living with MND; or asymptomatic genetic carriers of MND. Peer-reviewed studies utilising either quantitative or qualitative methodologies (or both) will be eligible for inclusion in this review. Methods and Analysis: A comprehensive search of electronic databases will be conducted to identify relevant studies. Data extraction, risk of bias assessment (of quantitative studies), and assessment of methodological limitations (of qualitative studies) will be performed independently by two reviewers. Quantitative data will be pooled using meta-analysis where appropriate, and qualitative data will be synthesised following a modified meta-aggregative approach. The relevant GRADE approach will be used to assess the certainty of evidence. Systematic Review Registration Number: CRD420250653287.

Indexed as

motor neurone diseasepreferencesvaluation of outcomesvalues

Identifiers

PMID42740751
PMCPMC13563348

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.