↓ Skip to main content

Evidence-based interventions in dementia: A pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of an educational intervention to promote earlier recognition and response to dementia in primary care (EVIDEM-ED)

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evidence-based interventions in dementia: A pragmatic cluster-randomised trial of an educational intervention to promote earlier recognition and response to dementia in primary care (EVIDEM-ED)
Published in
Trials, February 2010
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-11-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steve Iliffe, Jane Wilcock, Mark Griffin, Priya Jain, Ingela Thuné-Boyle, Tamar Koch, Frances Lefford

Abstract

The National Dementia Strategy seeks to enhance general practitioners' diagnostic and management skills in dementia. Early diagnosis in dementia within primary care is important as this allows those with dementia and their family care networks to engage with support services and plan for the future. There is, however, evidence that dementia remains under-detected and sub-optimally managed in general practice. An earlier unblinded, cluster randomised controlled study tested the effectiveness of educational interventions in improving detection rates and management of dementia in primary care. In this original trial, a computer decision support system and practice-based educational workshops were effective in improving rates of detecting dementia although not in changing clinical management. The challenge therefore is to find methods of changing clinical management. Our aim in this new trial is to test a customised educational intervention developed for general practice, promoting both earlier diagnosis and concordance with management guidelines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 167 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 38 22%
Student > Master 31 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Librarian 8 5%
Other 39 22%
Unknown 28 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 13%
Psychology 22 13%
Social Sciences 18 10%
Computer Science 10 6%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 35 20%