Cited by 45Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Cognitively Impaired Older Persons’ and Caregivers’ Perspectives on Dementia-Specific Advance Care Planning.

Open access
Fried, Terri R., Cohen, Andrew B., Harris, Joanna E., Moreines, Laura·2021·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Advance care planning (ACP) traditionally involves asking individuals about their treatment preferences during a brief period of incapacity near the end of life. Because dementia leads to prolonged incapacity, with many decisions arising before a terminal event, it has been suggested that dementia-specific ACP is necessary. We sought to elicit the perspectives of older adults with early cognitive impairment and their caregivers on traditional and dementia-specific ACP. DESIGN: Qualitative study with separate focus groups for patients and caregivers. SETTING: Memory disorder clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty eight persons aged 65+ with mild cognitive impairment or early dementia and 19 caregivers. MEASUREMENTS: Understanding of dementia trajectory and types of planning done; how medical decisions would be made in the future; thoughts about these decisions. RESULTS: No participants had engaged in any written form of dementia-specific planning. Barriers to dementia-specific ACP emerged, including lack of knowledge about the expected trajectory of dementia and potential medical decisions, the need to stay focused in the present because of fear of loss of self, disinterest in planning because the patient will not be aware of decisions, and the expectation that involved family members would take care of issues. Some patients had trouble engaging in the discussion. Patients had highly variable views on what the quality of their future life would be and on the leeway their surrogates should have in decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Even among patients with early cognitive impairment seen in specialty clinics and their caregivers, most were unaware of the decisions they could face, and there were many barriers to planning for these decisions. These issues would likely be magnified in more representative populations, and highlight challenges to the use of dementia-specific advance directive documents.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jgs.16953

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Many patients with early stages of cognitive impairment and their care partners are not interested in ACP conversations because they want to live in the moment, think dementia is unrelated to physical health, or do not see the point in partaking in ACP as they would not be aware of the decisions made for them in the advanced stages due to cognitive decline.

    “Fried and colleagues reported that many patients with early stages of cognitive impairment and their care partners are not interested in ACP conversations as they want to live in the moment, think dementia is unrelated to physical health, or do not see the point in partaking in ACP as they would not be aware of the decisions made for them in the advanced stages due to cognitive decline [15].”

    From Acceptability of the voice your values, an advance care planning intervention in persons living with mild dementia using videoconferencing technology (2022) · cites this paper as [15]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several barriers to dementia-specific ACP have previously been identified by PLwD and their care partners.

    “Several barriers to dementia-specific ACP have previously been identified by PLwD and their care partners [15].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Institute of Medicine. Dying in America: Improving and honoring individual preferences near the end of life. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2014. 25927121

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fried, T. R., Cohen, A. B., Harris, J. E., & Moreines, L.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Corresponding author
Fried, Terri R.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-11-20
Volume
69
Issue
4
Pages
932-937
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W3098692086
Cited by
45
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3
FWCI
3.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Nursing Research (R01NR016007)
  • National Institute on Aging (K76AG059987, P30AG21342)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
advance directives, mild cognitive impairment, early-stage dementia, older adults, caregivers, barriers to planning, surrogate decision-making, end-of-life decisions
MeSH terms
Aged, Communication Barriers, Decision Making, Dementia, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Patient Participation, Quality of Life, Terminal Care, Mental Competency, Caregivers, Advance Care Planning, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review