Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Artículo Open Access |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Wiley
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gin2.70039 |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Inhaltsangabe:
- 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 Lynne Giles Tracy Merlin Zachary Munn Clinical and Public Health Guidelines 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. 10.1002/gin2.70039 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/