Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines

Guideline recommendations on the role of the... | HRB Open Research dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); const cookieDomain = window.location.hostname; const tld = buildTLD(); function buildTLD() { const domainParts = cookieDomain.split('.'); while (domainParts.length > 2) { domainParts.shift(); } return domainParts.join('.'); } function deleteCookie(cookieName) { if (!cookieName) { return; } const cookiePath = (cookieName.startsWith('retraction_warning_') || cookieName.startsWith('version_warning_')) ? '/articles/' + cookieName : '/'; // Yes, these three slightly different ways to try and remove cookies are necessary document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=' + cookieDomain + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=.' + tld + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; } function deleteGroupCookies(group) { if (!group) { return; } const domainData = OneTrust.GetDomainData(), cookies = domainData.Groups.filter(cookieGroup => cookieGroup.OptanonGroupId === group)[0].Cookies; cookies.forEach(cookie => deleteCookie(cookie.Name)); } function OptanonWrapper() { const cookieConsentGroups = []; for (group of OneTrust.GetDomainData().Groups) { cookieConsentGroups.push(group.OptanonGroupId); } OneTrust.OnConsentChanged(function(e) { const cookieConsentActiveGroups = OnetrustActiveGroups.split(',').filter(activeGroup => activeGroup); cookieConsentGroups.forEach(group => { if (!cookieConsentActiveGroups.includes(group)) { deleteGroupCookies(group); }; }); }); } window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://hrbopenresearch.org/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'HRB'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); Skip to content HRB Open Research file_upload Submit your research search clear search menu close clear Search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Data Guidelines Prepublication Checks Production Process Article Processing Charges Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers National Steering Group Policies Glossary FAQs Contact Blog My Account Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46" }, "headline": "Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for...", "datePublished": "2024-07-08T16:39:56", "dateModified": "2025-02-12T12:34:05", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Mary Cronin" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Aisling Jennings" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Marieke Perry" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Irene Hartigan" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Séan O'Dowd" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Nicola Cornally" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Suzanne Timmons" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Kieran Walsh" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Tony Foley" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "HRB Open Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 566, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 127 }, "description": " Introduction A timely diagnosis of dementia offers the opportunity of earlier intervention and activation of coordinated care plans. General Practitioners (GPs) play a key role in dementia diagnosis, from symptom recognition to clinical assessment, investigation, diagnosis and onward referral for confirmation of the diagnosis and subtyping. Dementia clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) offer clinicians guidance on dementia care but often do not specifically address the role of the GP in the diagnostic process. This protocol outlines a scoping review to identify evidence-based dementia clinical practice guidelines and map the recommended role of GPs in the diagnosis of dementia. Method The scoping review will be conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) will be used to guide the reporting. We will search five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library) for dementia CPGs published since 2019. CPGs are often not published in peer-reviewed journals; therefore, a parallel search of relevant grey literature will be conducted. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations and guideline developers. Two reviewers will independently screen all articles based on inclusion criteria, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Conclusion This scoping review will examine up-to-date dementia CPGs to determine recommendations for the role of GPs in the assessment, investigation, diagnosis and onward referral of patients with suspected dementia to secondary care. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2", "name": "Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner..." } } ] } Home Browse Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Cronin M, Jennings A, Perry M et al. Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Study Protocol Revised Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] Mary Cronin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3524-6014 1 , Aisling Jennings https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9246-3955 1 , Marieke Perry 2 , [...] Irene Hartigan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3043-5764 3 , Séan O'Dowd 4 , Nicola Cornally 3 , Suzanne Timmons https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7790-9552 5 , Kieran Walsh https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4386-3012 6 , Tony Foley https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3205-3871 1 Mary Cronin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3524-6014 1 , Aisling Jennings https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9246-3955 1 , [...] Marieke Perry 2 , Irene Hartigan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3043-5764 3 , Séan O'Dowd 4 , Nicola Cornally 3 , Suzanne Timmons https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7790-9552 5 , Kieran Walsh https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4386-3012 6 , Tony Foley https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3205-3871 1 PUBLISHED 12 Feb 2025 Author details Author details 1 Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 2 Department of Geriatrics, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 3 School of Nursing and Midwifery, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 4 HSE National Dementia Office, Tullamore, Ireland 5 Centre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 6 School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland Mary Cronin Roles: Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Aisling Jennings Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Marieke Perry Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Irene Hartigan Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Séan O'Dowd Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology Nicola Cornally Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Suzanne Timmons Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Kieran Walsh Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Tony Foley Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the Dementia Trials Ireland (DTI) and Dementia Research Network Ireland (DRNI) gateway. Abstract Introduction A timely diagnosis of dementia offers the opportunity of earlier intervention and activation of coordinated care plans. General Practitioners (GPs) play a key role in dementia diagnosis, from symptom recognition to clinical assessment, investigation, diagnosis and onward referral for confirmation of the diagnosis and subtyping. Dementia clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) offer clinicians guidance on dementia care but often do not specifically address the role of the GP in the diagnostic process. This protocol outlines a scoping review to identify evidence-based dementia clinical practice guidelines and map the recommended role of GPs in the diagnosis of dementia. Method The scoping review will be conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) will be used to guide the reporting. We will search five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library) for dementia CPGs published since 2019. CPGs are often not published in peer-reviewed journals; therefore, a parallel search of relevant grey literature will be conducted. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations and guideline developers. Two reviewers will independently screen all articles based on inclusion criteria, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Conclusion This scoping review will examine up-to-date dementia CPGs to determine recommendations for the role of GPs in the assessment, investigation, diagnosis and onward referral of patients with suspected dementia to secondary care. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords General practice, primary healthcare, practice guidelines, diagnosis, dementia. Corresponding Author(s) Mary Cronin ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Mary Cronin Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: This work is supported by a Health Research Board Applied Partnership Award [APA-2022-027] Copyright: © 2025 Cronin M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Cronin M, Jennings A, Perry M et al. Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.2 ) First published: 08 Jul 2024, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.1 ) Latest published: 12 Feb 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.2 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 We thank both reviewers for their contributions, which improved the scoping review protocol considerably. We responded to each reviewer using a point-by-point response format and provided the details of the changes made. We have added to the introduction section to address the 'why' of referral, the imminent introduction of DMTs, and the critical role GPs will play in early identification, assessment, and referral to specialist services. In the introduction, we have also addressed the international context of the role of the GP. We have provided more detail in the method section about how we will contact GP professional organisations and included an update of the search before the final analysis. In the conclusion, we expanded on the potential impact of the research to include the development of a dementia diagnosis and management guidance document for GPs in Ireland and potentially to inform the development of a referral form to support referral from primary care to secondary care for patients with suspected cognitive impairment or dementia. We thank both reviewers for their contributions, which improved the scoping review protocol considerably. We responded to each reviewer using a point-by-point response format and provided the details of the changes made. We have added to the introduction section to address the 'why' of referral, the imminent introduction of DMTs, and the critical role GPs will play in early identification, assessment, and referral to specialist services. In the introduction, we have also addressed the international context of the role of the GP. We have provided more detail in the method section about how we will contact GP professional organisations and included an update of the search before the final analysis. In the conclusion, we expanded on the potential impact of the research to include the development of a dementia diagnosis and management guidance document for GPs in Ireland and potentially to inform the development of a referral form to support referral from primary care to secondary care for patients with suspected cognitive impairment or dementia. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Emer O'Brien See the authors' detailed response to the review by Soo Borson READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction Dementia is an acquired cognitive function loss across several domains 1 with progressive and potentially severe effects on day-to-day living for patients and their families. Globally, approximately 55 million people live with dementia, with an annual incidence of nearly 10 million cases 2 , making dementia care a global health priority 3 . A timely diagnosis of dementia is important as it can improve the quality of life of people with dementia and their family caregivers 4 . Furthermore, with the emergence of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs), early identification and onward referral for further specialist evaluation is critical as DMTs are indicated for use in early disease stages due to their potential to slow progression but not reverse existing symptoms 5 . General Practitioners (GPs), as the usual first point of contact, have a key role in symptom recognition, assessment and referral of patients with suspected dementia. This may involve the direct diagnosis of dementia by the GP or, more usually, the completion of a detailed clinical assessment, relevant investigations and the exclusion of other differential diagnoses prior to onward referral 6 – 8 . In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources 9 , 10 . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care 11 . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans 12 . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. Dementia remains underdiagnosed despite the important implications for patients and their families. While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care 13 , research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach 14 . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis 15 . Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs often activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients 14 . When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services 14 , 15 . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their caregivers 16 , 17 leading to further diagnostic delays. The timing of the diagnosis of dementia is important. Up until now, the absence of effective disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to National Dementia Strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis, i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration 18 . However, the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease (AD) will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis 19 . The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and the limited resources of healthcare systems 20 . It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed. In parallel with the introduction of DMTs, the diagnostic pathway of AD is transforming with the introduction of AD-specific biomarkers, most commonly amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers 21 . Recent findings suggest that blood-based biomarkers (BBMs) will be introduced into clinical practice within two-three years 22 . GPs often look to evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to facilitate decision-making in the clinical setting 23 . A recent systematic review of CPGs for dementia found that many publications include information on diagnosis, treatment and monitoring, with a small number of more recent publications also including screening 24 . The process of the development of CPGs varies internationally. In some countries, such as The Netherlands, CPGs are developed specifically for GPs25. In contrast, in other countries, guidelines are developed by national organisations, such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), for a broad range of healthcare professionals, often with GPs as contributors 25 . Recommendations around clinical assessment and onward referral from primary to secondary care are often not addressed or are unclear in CPGs. For example, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline indicates referral to specialist services when dementia is still suspected after reversible causes of cognitive decline or cognitive impairment from medicines have been investigated 7 . In comparison, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guideline suggests several cognitive tests that may be used to identify patients who would benefit from referral to secondary care 26 . Despite their central position, the specific role of GPs in the diagnostic process has not been systematically examined within CPGs. To the best of our knowledge, no systematic attempts have been made to compare recommendations from existing dementia CPGs with respect to the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. This review aims to identify CPGs that include a focus on the diagnosis of dementia and examine the specific role of GPs in the clinical assessment, investigation, diagnosis and referral of patients to secondary care. The review findings will inform the development of a dementia diagnosis and management guidance document for GPs in Ireland and has the potential to inform the development of a dementia referral form that may be used when referring a patient with suspected cognitive impairment or dementia from primary to secondary care. Method The method will follow the procedure outlined by Arksey and O'Malley 27 while incorporating additional revisions and suggestions for enhancing and strengthening the framework 28 , 29 . Therefore, the review follows a six-step process including: (1) identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results, (6) consultation exercise with stakeholders. Each of the six steps in the framework are outlined in detail below. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) 30 will guide the reporting of the scoping review. The PRISMA-ScR provides a standardised system for researchers to report scoping reviews and includes twenty essential and two optional items in a checklist format. The checklist includes the key items considered essential for providing full transparency around the research process. The completed checklist will be provided in the scoping review publication. The quality of the included guidelines will be assessed using the AGREE II instrument 31 . This scoping review protocol was registered with Open Science Framework on 17th June, 2024. 1. Identifying the research question The Population, Concept, Context (PCC) model 32 , 33 , widely recommended for scoping reviews, was used to determine the focus of the research question and to formulate inclusion and exclusion criteria. Search terms (See Table 1 ) were developed by the research team using a literature review and informed by previous systematic and scoping reviews related to clinical practice guidelines and dementia 24 , 34 , 35 . An information specialist from University College Cork was consulted to finalise the research terms. The search terms will be refined further based on retrieved abstracts 28 . Table 1. Search terms. Search terms Patients with cognitive impairment or dementia dementia* OR Alzheimer* OR “cognitive impairment” OR “Cognitive decline” OR “cognitive dysfunction” Management or diagnosis of dementia Diagnos* OR screen* OR “best clinical practice” OR “disease management” OR manage* OR “principles of car*” OR “comprehensive car*” Guideline Guid* OR “best practice*” OR procedure* OR “Clinical Practice Guideline*” OR recommend* Overarching research question: What is the recommended role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia in CPGs? Specifically, the review will focus on the following questions: 1. What CPGs on dementia care include a focus on the diagnostic process in the general practice setting? 2. What are the recommendations regarding the role of the GP in the clinical assessment, investigation, and diagnosis of dementia? 3. What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? 4. What are the CPG recommendations regarding dementia diagnostic criteria? 5. With specific reference to the introduction of biomarkers and novel disease modifying therapies for AD, what are the recommendations regarding the diagnostic process in general practice? 2. Identifying relevant studies Searches will be carried out on databases of peer-reviewed literature (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library). We will use the alerts feature on databases to keep up to date with any new publications throughout the course of the review. Given that many CPGs may not be published in peer-reviewed databases, we will primarily search the grey literature. The grey literature search will include Lenus (the Irish Health Repository), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) websites and generic search engines, i.e. Google and Google Scholar (first 200 citations). In addition, we will search appropriate databases for guidelines including, but not limited to, Guideline Central, Guidelines International Network, UpToDate, TRIP, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, using combinations of the keywords used in the bibliographic database search. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally, as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Where there is more than one guideline from the same author or organisation we will use the most up-to-date version. We will also search the reference lists of all included CPGs. Searches will be limited to titles and abstracts, and all identified citations will be uploaded to Covidence for screening and data management purposes. The literature search will be limited to publications from January 2019 to May 2024. These timelines were selected to reflect the evolution of clinical practice and to update the literature since the publication of the most recent CPG on dementia care for GPs in Ireland in 2019 36 . To ensure the comprehensiveness and currency of our review, we will conduct an updated literature search prior to the final analysis. This search will again include the original databases PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library, covering the period from the last search date to the present. Any new studies meeting the inclusion criteria will be incorporated into the final synthesis. 3. Study selection The title and abstract of papers will be screened initially, and full-text papers will then be reviewed for inclusion. Clinical practice guidelines will be translated into English when required. Full-text studies that do not meet the inclusion criteria will be excluded, and the reasons for exclusion will be provided in an appendix in the final scoping review (See Table 2 for inclusion/exclusion criteria). Where there is conflict, another member of the multidisciplinary research team will act as a third reviewer. This systematic team approach to study selection is recommended to ensure rigour 28 . Table 2. Eligibility criteria. Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Papers from the past five years (2019–2024) will be included to gain up-to-date clinical guidance. Guidelines for the management or diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), early Alzheimer’s Disease and related dementias. Evidence-based guidelines produced by national and international groups to guide clinical practice following formal procedures for practice guideline development. Relevant to the diagnosis of dementia in primary care. Relevance determined by the inclusion of: ● Screening to identify patients with MCI or Dementia ● Clinical assessment ● Diagnosis ● Elimination of other possible causes of symptoms ● Investigation of dementia ● Recommendations for referral Guidelines in any language. Guidelines for specific populations, e.g. guidelines for dementia in young adults or those with ID. Guidelines not evidence-based or where the guideline development is not transparent. Regional guidelines. Research studies, academic journal articles such as those examining guideline adherence, compliance, development, or evaluation. Editorials. Conference proceedings and theses. Study Protocols. Guidelines specific to genetic testing, risk factors, dementia prevention, post-diagnosis care, palliative care, treatment or therapies for the management of dementia. Guidelines specific for other health professionals, i.e., nurses, Allied Healthcare Professionals, or caregivers. Guidelines for use in in-patient hospital settings. National strategies or policies. Summaries of CPGs 4. Charting of the data Data charting involves charting the data according to key issues and themes 27 . We will also conduct another step to charting, which involves two reviewers independently charting five to ten papers using the form and then consulting to discuss if their approach is consistent 28 . Therefore, we will develop a draft form to include items such as 1) authors, 2) year of publication, 3) country of origin, 4) aims/ objectives, 5) type of guideline/guidance, 6) clinical history, 7) physical examination 8) cognitive screening tests 9) investigations, 10) exclusion of other diagnosis 11) communication to other healthcare professionals 12) DMTs 13) biomarkers and 14) referral to specialist services. We will review a number of papers using the form and will consult and update the form, as necessary. Following the finalisation of the charting form, we will chart the remaining papers and consult to finalise the charting in an iterative process. 5. Summarising and reporting results Two reviewers will summarise findings from the extracted data to include a descriptive numerical summary of the characteristics of the included guidelines. The research team will produce a complete synthesis of recommendations for referral from primary care to secondary care. Results will be reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines 30 . Each research question will be reported separately and presented in a tabular form and as a narrative summary. 6. Consultation exercise with stakeholders Arksey & O’Malley suggested that a consultation exercise with stakeholders is an optional step 27 . However, Levac et al. and Daudt et al. suggest that this should be required for a scoping review 28 , 29 . We will engage with GPs, secondary care specialists, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and with The Dementia Research Advisory Team (DRAT) of the Alzheimer’s Society of Ireland. DRAT is a group of people living with dementia and carers/supporters who are involved in dementia research as co-researchers. Conclusions The findings from this scoping review will inform the development of a dementia diagnosis and management guidance document for GPs in Ireland and will have the potential to inform the development of a referral form to support referral from primary care to secondary care for patients with suspected cognitive impairment or dementia. The imminent introduction of DMTs for Alzheimer's disease underscores the urgency and importance of the early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. GPs will play a critical role in early identification, assessment, and referral to specialist services. This shift will necessitate clear, evidence-informed diagnostic pathways from primary to secondary care, to ensure patients receive equitable, appropriate and timely care. The rigorous and transparent methodology and a strong multidisciplinary team approach will ensure that the guideline and referral form is based on rich data and provides appropriate information to GPs. The research findings will also be submitted for publication in relevant peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. Data availability No data are associated with this article. Faculty Opinions recommended References 1. Arvanitakis Z, Shah RC, Bennett DA: Diagnosis and management of dementia: review. JAMA. 2019; 322 (16): 1589–99. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 2. WHO: Dementia. 2022. Reference Source 3. Livingston G, Baio G, Sommerlad A, et al. : Effectiveness of an intervention to facilitate prompt referral to memory clinics in the United Kingdom: cluster randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2017; 14 (3): e1002252. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 4. Tierney L, Mason R, Doherty K, et al. : Workshops on diagnosis and management of dementia for general practitioners: a pre–post intervention study of dementia knowledge. BMJ Open. 2019; 9 (4): e027804. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 5. Liu Y, Jun H, Becker A, et al. : Detection rates of mild cognitive impairment in primary care for the United States medicare population. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2024; 11 (1): 7–12. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 6. Begley EGM, Kelly G, Keogh F, et al. : Model of care for dementia in Ireland. Tullamore: National Dementia Services; 2023. Reference Source 7. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Guidelines: Dementia: assessment, management and support for people living with dementia and their carers. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), 2018. PubMed Abstract 8. Department of Health: The Irish national dementia strategy. 2014. Reference Source 9. Wammes JJG, Jeurissen PPT, Verhoef LM, et al. : Is the role as gatekeeper still feasible? A survey among Dutch general practitioners. Fam Pract. 2014; 31 (5): 538–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 10. Bi YN, Liu YA: GPs in UK: from health gatekeepers in primary care to health agents in primary health care. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023; 16 : 1929–39. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 11. Collyer FM, Willis KF, Lewis S: Gatekeepers in the healthcare sector: knowledge and Bourdieu's concept of field. Soc Sci Med. 2017; 186 : 96–103. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 12. Starfield B: Is primary care essential? Lancet. 1994; 344 (8930): 1129–33. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 13. Cox CG, Brush BL, Kobayashi LC, et al. : Determinants of dementia diagnosis in U.S. primary care in the past decade: a scoping review. J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2025; 12 (2): 100035. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 14. Dhedhi SA, Swinglehurst D, Russell J: ‘Timely’ diagnosis of dementia: what does it mean? A narrative analysis of GPs’ accounts. BMJ Open. 2014; 4 (3): e004439. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 15. Visser FCW, Eersel MEA, Zaag-Loonen HJ, et al. : Doing the right thing? General practitioners' considerations in achieving a timely dementia diagnosis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2024; 39 (9): e6142. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 16. Foley T, Boyle S, Jennings A, et al. : “We’re certainly not in our comfort zone”: a qualitative study of GPs’ dementia-care educational needs. BMC Fam Pract. 2017; 18 (1): 66. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 17. Leone C, Winterton R, Chisholm M, et al. : Understanding the role of agency in the navigation of regional dementia care and support service pathways. Dementia (London). 2024; 14713012241281620. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Vinay R, Biller-Andorno N: A critical analysis of national dementia care guidances. Health Policy. 2023; 130 : 104736. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 19. Dobson R, Patterson K, Malik R, et al. : Eligibility for antiamyloid treatment: preparing for disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2024; 95 (9): 796–803. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 20. Smith EE, Phillips N, Feldman HH, et al. : Use of Lecanemab and donanemab in the Canadian healthcare system: evidence, challenges, and areas for future research. medRxiv. 2024; 2024.11.18.24317292. Publisher Full Text 21. Dubois B, Villain N, Schneider L, et al. : Alzheimer disease as a clinical-biological construct—An International Working Group Recommendation. JAMA Neurol. 2024; 81 (12): 1304–11. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 22. Palmqvist S, Tideman P, Mattsson-Carlgren N, et al. : Blood biomarkers to detect alzheimer disease in primary care and secondary care. JAMA. 2024; 332 (15): 1245–57. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 23. Wang T, Tan JB, Liu XL, et al. : Barriers and enablers to implementing clinical practice guidelines in primary care: an overview of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2023; 13 (1): e062158. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 24. Monfared AAT, Phan NTN, Pearson I, et al. : A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for Alzheimer's Disease and strategies for future advancements. Neurol Ther. 2023; 12 (4): 1257–1284. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 25. O'Brien E, Clyne B, Smith SM, et al. : A scoping review protocol of evidence-based guidance and guidelines published by General Practitioner professional organisations [version 3; peer review: 2 approved, 1 not approved]. HRB Open Res. 2022; 4 : 53. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 26. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network: Assessment, diagnosis, care and support for people with dementia and their carers. Contract No.: publication no. 168, 2023. Reference Source 27. Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005; 8 (1): 19–32. Publisher Full Text 28. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK: Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010; 5 (1): 69. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 29. Daudt HML, van Mossel C, Scott SJ: Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team's experience with Arksey and O'Malley's framework. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013; 13 (1): 48. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 30. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. : PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169 (7): 467–73. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 31. Brouwers MC, Kho ME, Browman GP, et al. : AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care. CMAJ. 2010; 182 (18): E839–E42. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 32. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. : Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015; 13 (3): 141–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 33. Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al. : Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020; 18 (10): 2119–2126. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 34. Ma H, Lu X, Zhou A, et al. : Clinical practice guidelines for the management of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia: a systematic review with AGREE II. Front Neurol. 2022; 13 : 799723. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 35. Arevalo-Rodriguez I, Pedraza OL, Rodríguez A, et al. : Alzheimer's disease dementia guidelines for diagnostic testing: a systematic review. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2013; 28 (2): 111–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 36. Foley T, Jennings A, Swanwick G: Dementia: diagnosis & management in general practice - quick reference guide. Dublin: ICGP; 2019. Reference Source Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 08 Jul 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 2 Department of Geriatrics, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands 3 School of Nursing and Midwifery, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 4 HSE National Dementia Office, Tullamore, Ireland 5 Centre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 6 School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland Mary Cronin Roles: Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Aisling Jennings Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Marieke Perry Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Irene Hartigan Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Séan O'Dowd Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology Nicola Cornally Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Suzanne Timmons Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Kieran Walsh Roles: Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Tony Foley Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information This work is supported by a Health Research Board Applied Partnership Award [APA-2022-027] Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 12 Feb 2025, 7:46 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.2 version 1 Published: 08 Jul 2024, 7:46 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.1 Copyright © 2025 Cronin M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics VIEWS $counts.viewCount downloads Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Cronin M, Jennings A, Perry M et al. Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13919.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 12 Feb 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: O'Brien E. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45629 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45629 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 18 Feb 2025 Emer O'Brien , Department of General Practice, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45629 Thank you for your detailed responses. I think this version of the ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for your detailed responses. I think this version of the protocol is ready to be approved. All the best with the scoping review. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: general practice, scoping review, systematic review, evidence based practice I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT O'Brien E. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45629 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45629 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Borson S. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45630 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45630 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 13 Feb 2025 Soo Borson , University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45630 The authors have been ... Continue reading READ ALL The authors have been responsive to previous reviews. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Dementia in primary care; early detection of dementia; complex care approaches. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Borson S. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45630 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45630 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 08 Jul 2024 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Borson S. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r43930 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-43930 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 18 Dec 2024 Soo Borson , University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r43930 This paper describes a protocol for a scoping review of guidelines for GP diagnosis of dementia. While it's questionable whether a protocol paper for a scoping review requires publication on its own - rather than simply as part of the ... Continue reading READ ALL This paper describes a protocol for a scoping review of guidelines for GP diagnosis of dementia. While it's questionable whether a protocol paper for a scoping review requires publication on its own - rather than simply as part of the completed review when submitted - this is well done. A particular strength is the authors' intent to consult a range of relevant stakeholders as part of the scoping process. Suggestions: 1. I would strongly urge the authors to frame the 'why' of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia - regardless of specialist involvement? 2. I recommend similar attention to the 'why' of specialist referrals for diagnosis. We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. There has been a longterm mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the 'knee-jerk' expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful. 3. There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Dementia in primary care; early detection of dementia; complex care approaches. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Borson S. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r43930 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-43930 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 13 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin , Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 13 Feb 2025 Author Response Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the ... Continue reading Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the scarcity of resources. We have added two paragraphs to the Introduction section to address these important points. We feel this has strengthened the paper significantly, adding a real-world context to the diagnostic debate. In the full scoping review, we will further elaborate on these important points Point by point response: Comment 1: Reviewer’s Comment “I would strongly urge the authors to frame the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia – regardless of specialist involvement?” RESPONSE : Thank you for this comment. We acknowledge that there is a complexity to the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis and how it informs patient care. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care (13) .Research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach (14) . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis (15) . GPs compare competing patient priorities, when deciding when to initiate the formal diagnostic process and when to refer onwards to secondary care for confirmation of a suspected diagnosis of dementia. Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients (14) .’(Introduction Paragraph 2). Comment 2: Reviewer’s Comment: “I recommend similar attention to the ‘why’ of specialist referrals for diagnosis. ​ We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. ​ There has been a long-term mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the ‘knee-jerk’ expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). ​ It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful.” ​ RESPONSE: We appreciate your comment and agree that the rationale for specialist referrals needs to be clearly articulated. We have added the text below and expanded further in response to comment no.3. ‘When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services (14, 15) . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their carers, (16, 17) leading to further diagnostic delays.’ (Introduction Paragraph 3) Comment 3: Reviewer’s Comment: "There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. ​ Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective." ​ RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment regarding disease modifying therapies and limited resources. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘Up until now, the absence of effective disease modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to national dementia strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration (Vinay). However, the move towards a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis (Dobson). Healthcare systems are poorly prepared for this paradigm shift in diagnosis and treatment. The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and on the limited resources of healthcare systems too (Smith). ​ It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed.’(Introduction paragraph 3) Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the scarcity of resources. We have added two paragraphs to the Introduction section to address these important points. We feel this has strengthened the paper significantly, adding a real-world context to the diagnostic debate. In the full scoping review, we will further elaborate on these important points Point by point response: Comment 1: Reviewer’s Comment “I would strongly urge the authors to frame the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia – regardless of specialist involvement?” RESPONSE : Thank you for this comment. We acknowledge that there is a complexity to the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis and how it informs patient care. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care (13) .Research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach (14) . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis (15) . GPs compare competing patient priorities, when deciding when to initiate the formal diagnostic process and when to refer onwards to secondary care for confirmation of a suspected diagnosis of dementia. Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients (14) .’(Introduction Paragraph 2). Comment 2: Reviewer’s Comment: “I recommend similar attention to the ‘why’ of specialist referrals for diagnosis. ​ We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. ​ There has been a long-term mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the ‘knee-jerk’ expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). ​ It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful.” ​ RESPONSE: We appreciate your comment and agree that the rationale for specialist referrals needs to be clearly articulated. We have added the text below and expanded further in response to comment no.3. ‘When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services (14, 15) . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their carers, (16, 17) leading to further diagnostic delays.’ (Introduction Paragraph 3) Comment 3: Reviewer’s Comment: "There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. ​ Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective." ​ RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment regarding disease modifying therapies and limited resources. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘Up until now, the absence of effective disease modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to national dementia strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration (Vinay). However, the move towards a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis (Dobson). Healthcare systems are poorly prepared for this paradigm shift in diagnosis and treatment. The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and on the limited resources of healthcare systems too (Smith). ​ It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed.’(Introduction paragraph 3) Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 13 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin , Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 13 Feb 2025 Author Response Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the ... Continue reading Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the scarcity of resources. We have added two paragraphs to the Introduction section to address these important points. We feel this has strengthened the paper significantly, adding a real-world context to the diagnostic debate. In the full scoping review, we will further elaborate on these important points Point by point response: Comment 1: Reviewer’s Comment “I would strongly urge the authors to frame the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia – regardless of specialist involvement?” RESPONSE : Thank you for this comment. We acknowledge that there is a complexity to the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis and how it informs patient care. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care (13) .Research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach (14) . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis (15) . GPs compare competing patient priorities, when deciding when to initiate the formal diagnostic process and when to refer onwards to secondary care for confirmation of a suspected diagnosis of dementia. Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients (14) .’(Introduction Paragraph 2). Comment 2: Reviewer’s Comment: “I recommend similar attention to the ‘why’ of specialist referrals for diagnosis. ​ We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. ​ There has been a long-term mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the ‘knee-jerk’ expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). ​ It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful.” ​ RESPONSE: We appreciate your comment and agree that the rationale for specialist referrals needs to be clearly articulated. We have added the text below and expanded further in response to comment no.3. ‘When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services (14, 15) . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their carers, (16, 17) leading to further diagnostic delays.’ (Introduction Paragraph 3) Comment 3: Reviewer’s Comment: "There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. ​ Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective." ​ RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment regarding disease modifying therapies and limited resources. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘Up until now, the absence of effective disease modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to national dementia strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration (Vinay). However, the move towards a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis (Dobson). Healthcare systems are poorly prepared for this paradigm shift in diagnosis and treatment. The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and on the limited resources of healthcare systems too (Smith). ​ It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed.’(Introduction paragraph 3) Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the scarcity of resources. We have added two paragraphs to the Introduction section to address these important points. We feel this has strengthened the paper significantly, adding a real-world context to the diagnostic debate. In the full scoping review, we will further elaborate on these important points Point by point response: Comment 1: Reviewer’s Comment “I would strongly urge the authors to frame the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia – regardless of specialist involvement?” RESPONSE : Thank you for this comment. We acknowledge that there is a complexity to the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis and how it informs patient care. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care (13) .Research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach (14) . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis (15) . GPs compare competing patient priorities, when deciding when to initiate the formal diagnostic process and when to refer onwards to secondary care for confirmation of a suspected diagnosis of dementia. Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients (14) .’(Introduction Paragraph 2). Comment 2: Reviewer’s Comment: “I recommend similar attention to the ‘why’ of specialist referrals for diagnosis. ​ We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. ​ There has been a long-term mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the ‘knee-jerk’ expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). ​ It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful.” ​ RESPONSE: We appreciate your comment and agree that the rationale for specialist referrals needs to be clearly articulated. We have added the text below and expanded further in response to comment no.3. ‘When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services (14, 15) . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their carers, (16, 17) leading to further diagnostic delays.’ (Introduction Paragraph 3) Comment 3: Reviewer’s Comment: "There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. ​ Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective." ​ RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment regarding disease modifying therapies and limited resources. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘Up until now, the absence of effective disease modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to national dementia strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration (Vinay). However, the move towards a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis (Dobson). Healthcare systems are poorly prepared for this paradigm shift in diagnosis and treatment. The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and on the limited resources of healthcare systems too (Smith). ​ It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed.’(Introduction paragraph 3) Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: O'Brien E. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r42855 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-42855 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 25 Nov 2024 Emer O'Brien , Department of General Practice, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r42855 Thank you for the opportunity to review this scoping review protocol on evidence relating to GP care of patients with dementia. Below are some comments for consideration by the authors. Overall The rational ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for the opportunity to review this scoping review protocol on evidence relating to GP care of patients with dementia. Below are some comments for consideration by the authors. Overall The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors. More specifically this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction. Further considerations The third objective is to determine what is the recommended referral process – I wonder will these details relating to the referral process be included in CPGs, this information may be available via international GP professional organisations. In the methods section - it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’ eg. available on GP professional organisations websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al, it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice. Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs. Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria. Consultation – this is a most welcome step as will ensure both healthcare professional and patient involvement which should increase the likelihood of implementation." Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: general practice, scoping review, systematic review, evidence based practice I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT O'Brien E. Reviewer Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r42855 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-42855 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 12 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin , Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 12 Feb 2025 Author Response Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the ... Continue reading Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the protocol paper. We have added information to the introduction and method to address these points, and they will be further explored in the discussion of our findings in the scoping review paper. Point-by-point response: Comment 1 Reviewer’s comment : “The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors.” RESPONSE : Thank you for this observation. This was carefully considered during our preliminary searches to refine the search terms. Our initial searches indicated that CPGs for dementia care were published by both national organisations and GP professional organisations. Therefore, to ensure a rigorous approach, we will search the websites of GP professional organisations, both nationally and internationally, as well as the peer-review databases and other sources of grey literature. Where no guidelines are available on the website, we will email the organisations to request copies. We have now amended the protocol method section to reflect this. The following text has been added. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Comment 2 Reviewer’s comment: “More specifically, this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction.” RESPONSE : Thank you. In the introduction, we have now mentioned the complexity of differing health systems internationally, which will also be addressed in more detail in the scoping review paper. We have also acknowledged that different organisations may be responsible for guideline development, and similarly, we aim to address this further based on our findings. The following text has been added to the introduction. In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources (9, 10) . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care (11) . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans (12) . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. (Introduction paragraph 2) The development of CPGs can vary with some countries, such as The Netherlands, developing practice guidelines specifically for GPs. In contrast, in other countries such as the UK, guidelines are developed by national organisations (Introduction paragraph 5) Comment 3 Reviewer’s comment: “The third objective is to determine the recommended referral process. I wonder if these details relating to the referral process will be included in CPGs. This information may be available via international GP professional organisations.” RESPONSE: Thank you; this is a very valid point. However, this review examines Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to establish the recommended role of the GP across diagnostic and referral processes. Therefore, it was felt that considering other sources of referral information would be outside the scope. We have amended the third research objective to clarify this. We will also revisit this point in the discussion section of our scoping review paper. The third objective now includes the following text: What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? Comment 4 Reviewer’s comment: “In the methods section, it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’, e.g., available on GP professional organisations' websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above, and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al., it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice.” RESPONSE: Thank you we appreciate that this needs clarifying. We have added some additional information to clarify what is meant by ‘published’. You make an interesting observation about the review by Monfared et al. (2023), and we did consider this. Although the authors reviewed screening and diagnosis recommendations, it was not within the scope of their review to consider the recommended role of the GP. In addition, many of the included CPGs in the Monfared et al. review were published in 2018, and we felt it important to gain more up-to-date data if possible. We have now added the following text to the section ‘identifying relevant studies’: We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Comment 5 Reviewer’s comment: “Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs”. RESPONSE: Yes, thank you. We will contact the organisations to gain access, which has now been clarified in the method section. We do not intend to include open-access summaries, and we have now clarified this in the exclusion criteria. The following text indicates these changes: Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. (Method section: Identifying relevant studies) Summaries of CPGs (added to exclusion criteria) Comment 6 Reviewer’s comment: “Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous“ RESPONSE: We appreciate that this may be unclear; therefore, we have removed the criteria ‘appropriate for use in primary care’. The next point ‘relevant for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care’ indicates our approach to inclusion and outlines what is meant by ‘relevant’. We have amended the exclusion criteria section to clarify what is meant by hospital settings. The revised text reads: Guidelines for use in hospital in-patient settings.(Exclusion criteria) Comment 7 Reviewer’s comment “Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria”. RESPONSE : Thank you. For clarity, we have removed the word guidance. Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the protocol paper. We have added information to the introduction and method to address these points, and they will be further explored in the discussion of our findings in the scoping review paper. Point-by-point response: Comment 1 Reviewer’s comment : “The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors.” RESPONSE : Thank you for this observation. This was carefully considered during our preliminary searches to refine the search terms. Our initial searches indicated that CPGs for dementia care were published by both national organisations and GP professional organisations. Therefore, to ensure a rigorous approach, we will search the websites of GP professional organisations, both nationally and internationally, as well as the peer-review databases and other sources of grey literature. Where no guidelines are available on the website, we will email the organisations to request copies. We have now amended the protocol method section to reflect this. The following text has been added. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Comment 2 Reviewer’s comment: “More specifically, this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction.” RESPONSE : Thank you. In the introduction, we have now mentioned the complexity of differing health systems internationally, which will also be addressed in more detail in the scoping review paper. We have also acknowledged that different organisations may be responsible for guideline development, and similarly, we aim to address this further based on our findings. The following text has been added to the introduction. In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources (9, 10) . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care (11) . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans (12) . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. (Introduction paragraph 2) The development of CPGs can vary with some countries, such as The Netherlands, developing practice guidelines specifically for GPs. In contrast, in other countries such as the UK, guidelines are developed by national organisations (Introduction paragraph 5) Comment 3 Reviewer’s comment: “The third objective is to determine the recommended referral process. I wonder if these details relating to the referral process will be included in CPGs. This information may be available via international GP professional organisations.” RESPONSE: Thank you; this is a very valid point. However, this review examines Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to establish the recommended role of the GP across diagnostic and referral processes. Therefore, it was felt that considering other sources of referral information would be outside the scope. We have amended the third research objective to clarify this. We will also revisit this point in the discussion section of our scoping review paper. The third objective now includes the following text: What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? Comment 4 Reviewer’s comment: “In the methods section, it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’, e.g., available on GP professional organisations' websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above, and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al., it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice.” RESPONSE: Thank you we appreciate that this needs clarifying. We have added some additional information to clarify what is meant by ‘published’. You make an interesting observation about the review by Monfared et al. (2023), and we did consider this. Although the authors reviewed screening and diagnosis recommendations, it was not within the scope of their review to consider the recommended role of the GP. In addition, many of the included CPGs in the Monfared et al. review were published in 2018, and we felt it important to gain more up-to-date data if possible. We have now added the following text to the section ‘identifying relevant studies’: We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Comment 5 Reviewer’s comment: “Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs”. RESPONSE: Yes, thank you. We will contact the organisations to gain access, which has now been clarified in the method section. We do not intend to include open-access summaries, and we have now clarified this in the exclusion criteria. The following text indicates these changes: Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. (Method section: Identifying relevant studies) Summaries of CPGs (added to exclusion criteria) Comment 6 Reviewer’s comment: “Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous“ RESPONSE: We appreciate that this may be unclear; therefore, we have removed the criteria ‘appropriate for use in primary care’. The next point ‘relevant for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care’ indicates our approach to inclusion and outlines what is meant by ‘relevant’. We have amended the exclusion criteria section to clarify what is meant by hospital settings. The revised text reads: Guidelines for use in hospital in-patient settings.(Exclusion criteria) Comment 7 Reviewer’s comment “Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria”. RESPONSE : Thank you. For clarity, we have removed the word guidance. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 12 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin , Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland 12 Feb 2025 Author Response Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the ... Continue reading Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the protocol paper. We have added information to the introduction and method to address these points, and they will be further explored in the discussion of our findings in the scoping review paper. Point-by-point response: Comment 1 Reviewer’s comment : “The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors.” RESPONSE : Thank you for this observation. This was carefully considered during our preliminary searches to refine the search terms. Our initial searches indicated that CPGs for dementia care were published by both national organisations and GP professional organisations. Therefore, to ensure a rigorous approach, we will search the websites of GP professional organisations, both nationally and internationally, as well as the peer-review databases and other sources of grey literature. Where no guidelines are available on the website, we will email the organisations to request copies. We have now amended the protocol method section to reflect this. The following text has been added. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Comment 2 Reviewer’s comment: “More specifically, this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction.” RESPONSE : Thank you. In the introduction, we have now mentioned the complexity of differing health systems internationally, which will also be addressed in more detail in the scoping review paper. We have also acknowledged that different organisations may be responsible for guideline development, and similarly, we aim to address this further based on our findings. The following text has been added to the introduction. In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources (9, 10) . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care (11) . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans (12) . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. (Introduction paragraph 2) The development of CPGs can vary with some countries, such as The Netherlands, developing practice guidelines specifically for GPs. In contrast, in other countries such as the UK, guidelines are developed by national organisations (Introduction paragraph 5) Comment 3 Reviewer’s comment: “The third objective is to determine the recommended referral process. I wonder if these details relating to the referral process will be included in CPGs. This information may be available via international GP professional organisations.” RESPONSE: Thank you; this is a very valid point. However, this review examines Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to establish the recommended role of the GP across diagnostic and referral processes. Therefore, it was felt that considering other sources of referral information would be outside the scope. We have amended the third research objective to clarify this. We will also revisit this point in the discussion section of our scoping review paper. The third objective now includes the following text: What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? Comment 4 Reviewer’s comment: “In the methods section, it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’, e.g., available on GP professional organisations' websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above, and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al., it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice.” RESPONSE: Thank you we appreciate that this needs clarifying. We have added some additional information to clarify what is meant by ‘published’. You make an interesting observation about the review by Monfared et al. (2023), and we did consider this. Although the authors reviewed screening and diagnosis recommendations, it was not within the scope of their review to consider the recommended role of the GP. In addition, many of the included CPGs in the Monfared et al. review were published in 2018, and we felt it important to gain more up-to-date data if possible. We have now added the following text to the section ‘identifying relevant studies’: We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Comment 5 Reviewer’s comment: “Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs”. RESPONSE: Yes, thank you. We will contact the organisations to gain access, which has now been clarified in the method section. We do not intend to include open-access summaries, and we have now clarified this in the exclusion criteria. The following text indicates these changes: Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. (Method section: Identifying relevant studies) Summaries of CPGs (added to exclusion criteria) Comment 6 Reviewer’s comment: “Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous“ RESPONSE: We appreciate that this may be unclear; therefore, we have removed the criteria ‘appropriate for use in primary care’. The next point ‘relevant for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care’ indicates our approach to inclusion and outlines what is meant by ‘relevant’. We have amended the exclusion criteria section to clarify what is meant by hospital settings. The revised text reads: Guidelines for use in hospital in-patient settings.(Exclusion criteria) Comment 7 Reviewer’s comment “Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria”. RESPONSE : Thank you. For clarity, we have removed the word guidance. Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the protocol paper. We have added information to the introduction and method to address these points, and they will be further explored in the discussion of our findings in the scoping review paper. Point-by-point response: Comment 1 Reviewer’s comment : “The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors.” RESPONSE : Thank you for this observation. This was carefully considered during our preliminary searches to refine the search terms. Our initial searches indicated that CPGs for dementia care were published by both national organisations and GP professional organisations. Therefore, to ensure a rigorous approach, we will search the websites of GP professional organisations, both nationally and internationally, as well as the peer-review databases and other sources of grey literature. Where no guidelines are available on the website, we will email the organisations to request copies. We have now amended the protocol method section to reflect this. The following text has been added. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Comment 2 Reviewer’s comment: “More specifically, this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction.” RESPONSE : Thank you. In the introduction, we have now mentioned the complexity of differing health systems internationally, which will also be addressed in more detail in the scoping review paper. We have also acknowledged that different organisations may be responsible for guideline development, and similarly, we aim to address this further based on our findings. The following text has been added to the introduction. In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources (9, 10) . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care (11) . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans (12) . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. (Introduction paragraph 2) The development of CPGs can vary with some countries, such as The Netherlands, developing practice guidelines specifically for GPs. In contrast, in other countries such as the UK, guidelines are developed by national organisations (Introduction paragraph 5) Comment 3 Reviewer’s comment: “The third objective is to determine the recommended referral process. I wonder if these details relating to the referral process will be included in CPGs. This information may be available via international GP professional organisations.” RESPONSE: Thank you; this is a very valid point. However, this review examines Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to establish the recommended role of the GP across diagnostic and referral processes. Therefore, it was felt that considering other sources of referral information would be outside the scope. We have amended the third research objective to clarify this. We will also revisit this point in the discussion section of our scoping review paper. The third objective now includes the following text: What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? Comment 4 Reviewer’s comment: “In the methods section, it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’, e.g., available on GP professional organisations' websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above, and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al., it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice.” RESPONSE: Thank you we appreciate that this needs clarifying. We have added some additional information to clarify what is meant by ‘published’. You make an interesting observation about the review by Monfared et al. (2023), and we did consider this. Although the authors reviewed screening and diagnosis recommendations, it was not within the scope of their review to consider the recommended role of the GP. In addition, many of the included CPGs in the Monfared et al. review were published in 2018, and we felt it important to gain more up-to-date data if possible. We have now added the following text to the section ‘identifying relevant studies’: We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Comment 5 Reviewer’s comment: “Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs”. RESPONSE: Yes, thank you. We will contact the organisations to gain access, which has now been clarified in the method section. We do not intend to include open-access summaries, and we have now clarified this in the exclusion criteria. The following text indicates these changes: Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. (Method section: Identifying relevant studies) Summaries of CPGs (added to exclusion criteria) Comment 6 Reviewer’s comment: “Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous“ RESPONSE: We appreciate that this may be unclear; therefore, we have removed the criteria ‘appropriate for use in primary care’. The next point ‘relevant for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care’ indicates our approach to inclusion and outlines what is meant by ‘relevant’. We have amended the exclusion criteria section to clarify what is meant by hospital settings. The revised text reads: Guidelines for use in hospital in-patient settings.(Exclusion criteria) Comment 7 Reviewer’s comment “Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria”. RESPONSE : Thank you. For clarity, we have removed the word guidance. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 08 Jul 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 Version 2 (revision) 12 Feb 25 read read Version 1 08 Jul 24 read read Emer O'Brien , Department of General Practice, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland Soo Borson , University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 O'Brien E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 18 Feb 2025 | for Version 2 Emer O'Brien , Department of General Practice, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland 0 Views copyright © 2025 O'Brien E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for your detailed responses. I think this version of the protocol is ready to be approved. All the best with the scoping review. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise general practice, scoping review, systematic review, evidence based practice I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) O'Brien E. Peer Review Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45629) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45629 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Borson S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 13 Feb 2025 | for Version 2 Soo Borson , University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA 0 Views copyright © 2025 Borson S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The authors have been responsive to previous reviews. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Dementia in primary care; early detection of dementia; complex care approaches. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Borson S. Peer Review Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15479.r45630) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2#referee-response-45630 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Borson S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 18 Dec 2024 | for Version 1 Soo Borson , University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA 0 Views copyright © 2024 Borson S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions This paper describes a protocol for a scoping review of guidelines for GP diagnosis of dementia. While it's questionable whether a protocol paper for a scoping review requires publication on its own - rather than simply as part of the completed review when submitted - this is well done. A particular strength is the authors' intent to consult a range of relevant stakeholders as part of the scoping process. Suggestions: 1. I would strongly urge the authors to frame the 'why' of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia - regardless of specialist involvement? 2. I recommend similar attention to the 'why' of specialist referrals for diagnosis. We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. There has been a longterm mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the 'knee-jerk' expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful. 3. There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Dementia in primary care; early detection of dementia; complex care approaches. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 13 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin, Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland Many thanks for the very helpful, constructive comments around the ‘why’ of GP diagnosis, the ‘why’ of referral to specialists for diagnosis and also the introduction of DMTs and the scarcity of resources. We have added two paragraphs to the Introduction section to address these important points. We feel this has strengthened the paper significantly, adding a real-world context to the diagnostic debate. In the full scoping review, we will further elaborate on these important points Point by point response: Comment 1: Reviewer’s Comment “I would strongly urge the authors to frame the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis, i.e. how making a dementia diagnosis in primary care informs patient (not just disease) management; what do GPs need to know about the individual and the family in order to provide primary care for people with dementia – regardless of specialist involvement?” RESPONSE : Thank you for this comment. We acknowledge that there is a complexity to the ‘why’ of GP dementia diagnosis and how it informs patient care. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘While GPs have been criticised for low identification and dementia diagnosis rates in primary care (13) .Research has found that many GPs take a nuanced, patient-centred approach (14) . GPs undertake a complex, decision-making process, whereby they balance the risks and benefits of making the diagnosis (15) . GPs compare competing patient priorities, when deciding when to initiate the formal diagnostic process and when to refer onwards to secondary care for confirmation of a suspected diagnosis of dementia. Even in the absence of a formal diagnosis or disclosure of a diagnosis of dementia, GPs activate a range of dementia care services and supports for their patients (14) .’(Introduction Paragraph 2). Comment 2: Reviewer’s Comment: “I recommend similar attention to the ‘why’ of specialist referrals for diagnosis. ​ We know that patterns of diagnosis and management of dementia are heavily dependent on national, local, and specific practice-based opportunities, which are not equitably distributed. ​ There has been a long-term mismatch between recognition that GPs do most of the diagnosing and managing of patients with dementia and the ‘knee-jerk’ expectation that all patients with possible cognitive disorders need to see specialists; we know this is both infeasible, invalid when considered from a global perspective, and likely wasteful of scarce specialist resources (no offense to specialists; I am one). ​ It would be most welcome to have a critical, evidence-based review of decision points regarding who, when, and why specialist referral is important and useful.” ​ RESPONSE: We appreciate your comment and agree that the rationale for specialist referrals needs to be clearly articulated. We have added the text below and expanded further in response to comment no.3. ‘When deciding whether to initiate the formal diagnostic and referral process, GPs weigh up many different competing issues related to patient autonomy, consent, risks, patient needs, planning for the future, optimising treatments and access to dementia care services (14, 15) . Upon making a decision to refer to specialist services, dementia diagnostic and care pathways can be difficult to navigate for both GPs and for people living with dementia and their carers, (16, 17) leading to further diagnostic delays.’ (Introduction Paragraph 3) Comment 3: Reviewer’s Comment: "There will need to be some attention to another scarce resource - the availability of high-specificity diagnostic testing for etiology of dementia, and of disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease, which varies with country, region, population, health system, and many other ecological determinants. ​ Identifying candidates for such therapies is a major driver of specialist referral in some sectors of US health care; it would be valuable to consider this from a transnational perspective." ​ RESPONSE: Thank you for this comment regarding disease modifying therapies and limited resources. We have added the following text to address this point. ‘Up until now, the absence of effective disease modifying therapies (DMTs) has led to national dementia strategy recommendations for a ‘timely’ diagnosis of dementia as opposed to an ‘early’ diagnosis i.e. at the right time for the patients, taking the risks and benefits of diagnosis into consideration (Vinay). However, the move towards a biological diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease and the introduction of the first anti-amyloid immunotherapy DMTs for the treatment of patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease will inevitably necessitate a shift towards earlier identification and diagnosis (Dobson). Healthcare systems are poorly prepared for this paradigm shift in diagnosis and treatment. The emergence of DMTs will likely increase the pressures and demands on primary care and on the limited resources of healthcare systems too (Smith). ​ It will be important for GPs to identify potentially eligible patients with cognitive disorders, arrange early referral to specialist centres and coordinate care for patients during and after treatment. While the introduction of DMTs brings hope for many, evidence-informed, clear and equitable diagnostic pathways from primary care to specialist services will be urgently needed.’(Introduction paragraph 3) View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Borson S. Peer Review Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r43930) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-43930 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 O'Brien E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 25 Nov 2024 | for Version 1 Emer O'Brien , Department of General Practice, RCSI, Dublin, Ireland 0 Views copyright © 2024 O'Brien E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for the opportunity to review this scoping review protocol on evidence relating to GP care of patients with dementia. Below are some comments for consideration by the authors. Overall The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors. More specifically this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction. Further considerations The third objective is to determine what is the recommended referral process – I wonder will these details relating to the referral process be included in CPGs, this information may be available via international GP professional organisations. In the methods section - it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’ eg. available on GP professional organisations websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al, it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice. Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs. Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria. Consultation – this is a most welcome step as will ensure both healthcare professional and patient involvement which should increase the likelihood of implementation." Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise general practice, scoping review, systematic review, evidence based practice I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 12 Feb 2025 Mary Cronin, Department of General Practice, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland Many thanks for this helpful review, which raised valid points about the availability and development of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the international context, all of which add value to the protocol paper. We have added information to the introduction and method to address these points, and they will be further explored in the discussion of our findings in the scoping review paper. Point-by-point response: Comment 1 Reviewer’s comment : “The rational for the review is clearly outlined. The aim is to map the role of the GP in the diagnosis of dementia. I would suggest it might be sufficient to search International GP professional organisations specifically to determine best practice relating to the role of the GP in this process. This may require modification of the search strategy to include primary care/general practice and a specific focus on searching/contacting GP professional organisations, as these guidelines are not always available through database searches, as outlined by the authors.” RESPONSE : Thank you for this observation. This was carefully considered during our preliminary searches to refine the search terms. Our initial searches indicated that CPGs for dementia care were published by both national organisations and GP professional organisations. Therefore, to ensure a rigorous approach, we will search the websites of GP professional organisations, both nationally and internationally, as well as the peer-review databases and other sources of grey literature. Where no guidelines are available on the website, we will email the organisations to request copies. We have now amended the protocol method section to reflect this. The following text has been added. We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. Comment 2 Reviewer’s comment: “More specifically, this review wishes to explore ‘the specific role of the GP in… referral of patients to secondary care. CPGs may outline recommendations for referral between primary and secondary care but this interface will be different depending on the role of the GP in the healthcare system - the gatekeeper role. Another consideration might be who within the health system develops guidelines for use in general practice. For example, in the UK NICE hold this central function and there may be GP representatives on the guideline working group. In comparison in the Netherlands, it is the role of the GP professional organisation (NHG) to develop guidelines. I would suggest further exploration of these issues would be valuable in the introduction.” RESPONSE : Thank you. In the introduction, we have now mentioned the complexity of differing health systems internationally, which will also be addressed in more detail in the scoping review paper. We have also acknowledged that different organisations may be responsible for guideline development, and similarly, we aim to address this further based on our findings. The following text has been added to the introduction. In terms of the dementia diagnostic pathway, GPs play varying roles in healthcare systems worldwide, with a significant emphasis on a gatekeeping role in many countries. In the UK and Dutch healthcare systems, GPs serve as gatekeepers, managing patient access to specialists and ensuring efficient use of resources (9, 10) . Similarly, in Australia, GPs control patient referrals to specialists and diagnostic services, promoting cost-effectiveness and preventive care (11) . Conversely, in the United States, GPs have a less centralized gatekeeping role, as patients often have direct access to specialists, depending on insurance plans (12) . These varying GP roles reflect differing healthcare priorities, from cost containment to patient autonomy. (Introduction paragraph 2) The development of CPGs can vary with some countries, such as The Netherlands, developing practice guidelines specifically for GPs. In contrast, in other countries such as the UK, guidelines are developed by national organisations (Introduction paragraph 5) Comment 3 Reviewer’s comment: “The third objective is to determine the recommended referral process. I wonder if these details relating to the referral process will be included in CPGs. This information may be available via international GP professional organisations.” RESPONSE: Thank you; this is a very valid point. However, this review examines Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) to establish the recommended role of the GP across diagnostic and referral processes. Therefore, it was felt that considering other sources of referral information would be outside the scope. We have amended the third research objective to clarify this. We will also revisit this point in the discussion section of our scoping review paper. The third objective now includes the following text: What is the recommended referral process outlined in CPGs when referring a patient with suspected dementia from primary to secondary care? Comment 4 Reviewer’s comment: “In the methods section, it might be useful if the authors provide a definition for the word 'published’, e.g., available on GP professional organisations' websites (which can include national or international guidelines endorsed by professional organisations). As above, and in addition, given the 2023 SR by Monfared et al., it may be sufficient for the authors to review recommendations specific to general practice.” RESPONSE: Thank you we appreciate that this needs clarifying. We have added some additional information to clarify what is meant by ‘published’. You make an interesting observation about the review by Monfared et al. (2023), and we did consider this. Although the authors reviewed screening and diagnosis recommendations, it was not within the scope of their review to consider the recommended role of the GP. In addition, many of the included CPGs in the Monfared et al. review were published in 2018, and we felt it important to gain more up-to-date data if possible. We have now added the following text to the section ‘identifying relevant studies’: We will also search the websites of GP professional organisations nationally and internationally as guidelines are often made available for GPs through these platforms. Comment 5 Reviewer’s comment: “Identifying relevant studies – ‘ we will also search the websites of GP professional organisations both nationally and internationally ’ Consideration will need to be given to access – if the guidelines are not open access will these be excluded or will the summary (which often is open access) be included. Will the authors contact the organisation directly to gain access to the required CPGs”. RESPONSE: Yes, thank you. We will contact the organisations to gain access, which has now been clarified in the method section. We do not intend to include open-access summaries, and we have now clarified this in the exclusion criteria. The following text indicates these changes: Where dementia guidelines are unavailable (or inaccessible) on the professional organisation websites, we will contact them via email to request a copy. Google Translate will be used to increase the likelihood of a response from international GP organisations. (Method section: Identifying relevant studies) Summaries of CPGs (added to exclusion criteria) Comment 6 Reviewer’s comment: “Inclusion criteria – appropriate for use in primary care – if not including general practice/primary care in the search terms, the word appropriate will need to be clearly defined. Exclusion – guidelines for use in hospital settings – suggest clarify if hospital setting and secondary care are synonymous“ RESPONSE: We appreciate that this may be unclear; therefore, we have removed the criteria ‘appropriate for use in primary care’. The next point ‘relevant for the diagnosis of dementia in primary care’ indicates our approach to inclusion and outlines what is meant by ‘relevant’. We have amended the exclusion criteria section to clarify what is meant by hospital settings. The revised text reads: Guidelines for use in hospital in-patient settings.(Exclusion criteria) Comment 7 Reviewer’s comment “Guideline/guidance – the inclusion criteria is specific to 'guideline’ therefore suggest remove guidance or include an explanation for the word 'guidance' in the inclusion criteria”. RESPONSE : Thank you. For clarity, we have removed the word guidance. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern O'Brien E. Peer Review Report For: Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner in the diagnosis of dementia: a protocol for a scoping review of clinical practice guidelines [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :46 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15268.r42855) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v1#referee-response-42855 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with HRB Open Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Guideline recommendations on the role of...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Cronin M et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46", templates : { twitter : "Guideline recommendations on the role of the general practitioner.... Cronin M et al., published by " + "@HRBOpenRes" + ", https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-46/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/13919/15479") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "15479"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "42260": 0, "42261": 0, "42262": 0, "42263": 0, "43928": 0, "42264": 0, "43929": 0, "42265": 0, "42266": 0, "43930": 36, "43931": 0, "43932": 0, "44060": 0, "43933": 0, "44061": 0, "43934": 0, "44062": 0, "43935": 0, "44063": 0, "43936": 0, "44064": 0, "43937": 0, "44065": 0, "43938": 0, "44066": 0, "44067": 0, "44068": 0, "44069": 0, "41266": 0, "41267": 0, "41268": 0, "41269": 0, "41270": 0, "41271": 0, "41272": 0, "41273": 0, "41274": 0, "41275": 0, "45629": 25, "45630": 27, "42565": 0, "41542": 0, "41543": 0, "41544": 0, "41545": 0, "41546": 0, "41547": 0, "41548": 0, "41549": 0, "41550": 0, "41551": 0, "41819": 0, "41820": 0, "45788": 0, "41821": 0, "45789": 0, "41822": 0, "45790": 0, "41823": 0, "45791": 0, "41824": 0, "45792": 0, "41825": 0, "45793": 0, "41826": 0, "45794": 0, "41827": 0, "45795": 0, "41828": 0, "45796": 0, "45797": 0, "42855": 51, "42856": 0, "42088": 0, "42857": 0, "42089": 0, "42858": 0, "42090": 0, "42091": 0, "42092": 0, "42093": 0, "42094": 0, "42095": 0, "42096": 0, "42097": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "73146872-ad1c-437c-8706-671b2553a925"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); Are you a HRB-funded researcher? Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all HRB grantholders or people working on a HRB-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from HRB Open Research. First Name * You must provide your first name Last Name * You must provide your last name Email * You must provide a valid email address Institution You must provide an institution. Submit Thank you! We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to HRB Open Research HRB Open Research Browse How to Publish About Contact RSS Cookie Notice Privacy Notice Legal Submit Your Research © F1000 Research Limited and its licensors ISSN 2515-4826 | Legal background var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "hrb", displayName: "HRB Open Research", hostName: "hrbopenresearch.org", id: "5", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]" }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); }); (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument||a.contentWindow.document;if(b){var d=b.createElement('script');d.innerHTML="window.__CF$cv$params={r:'a0003469ffe552ad',t:'MTc3OTQ5ODg3Ng=='};var a=document.createElement('script');a.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js';document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(a);";b.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(d)}}if(document.body){var a=document.createElement('iframe');a.height=1;a.width=1;a.style.position='absolute';a.style.top=0;a.style.left=0;a.style.border='none';a.style.visibility='hidden';document.body.appendChild(a);if('loading'!==document.readyState)c();else if(window.addEventListener)document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',c);else{var e=document.onreadystatechange||function(){};document.onreadystatechange=function(b){e(b);'loading'!==document.readyState&&(document.onreadystatechange=e,c())}}}})();