Does promoting research advance planning in a general elderly population enhance completion of a research directive and proxies' predictive ability? a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Communicating wishes regarding future research participation in the event of incapacity may help others make enrollment decisions that are more consistent with these wishes. We tested whether an advance planning intervention (1) motivated older adults to document their wishes regarding future research participation and (2) guided proxies in making hypothetical research decisions that agreed with those of the older adult. Methods: This randomized trial involved 235 dyads of older adults and proxies. The experimental intervention consisted of a group information session on advance directives, coupled with two encounters with a facilitator who helped older adults communicate their wishes to their proxy. Control participants attended three educational workshops on healthy behaviors. Short descriptions of hypothetical studies were used at baseline and twice post intervention to elicit older adults' and proxies' decisions regarding study enrollment. Answers were elicited under four health states of increasing cognitive impairment. Results: By the end of the trial, 80% of older adults allocated to the experimental group had recorded their preferences; 61% indicated a willingness to participate in clinical research should they be solicited after losing decisional capacity. At baseline, percentages of agreement on enrollment decisions ranged from 63% for a blood draw in the older adult's current health state to 24% for a dementia drug trial. From baseline to the second posttest, agreement increased in the experimental group while declining among controls. The positive effect of the intervention was restricted to the severe dementia health state, with agreement rising from 26 to 37%. Conclusions: The intervention motivated older adults to document their preferences regarding future research involvement. It had little effect on proxies' ability to make hypothetical research decisions that match those of the older adult. It remains to be seen whether documented preferences would facilitate substitute decision making in hypothetical and actual research situations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".