Crossmark

Exploring barriers and facilitators for the potential implementation of the decision tool-functional independence in primary care

Crossref DOI link: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-13000-4

Published Online: 2025-07-01

Update policy: https://doi.org/10.1007/springer_crossmark_policy

Authors

Molenaar, E. A. L. M. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5096-9264
Barten, J. A. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1398-7970
Bleijenberg, N. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9964-7212
de Wit, N. J. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0273-8290
Veenhof, C. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0970-2896
License Information

Text and Data Mining valid from 2025-07-01

Version of Record valid from 2025-07-01
More Information

Article History

Received: 25 October 2024

Accepted: 3 June 2025

First Online: 1 July 2025

Declarations

:

: The Ethical Committee Research Healthcare Domain (ECO-GD) of the Department of Health Studies at HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht has reviewed the research proposal for this study. Based on a thorough review in light of European law and ethics regarding medical research, it was determined—under reference number 282-000-2024—that the research may proceed as proposed and does not fall within the scope of the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (). Therefore, the need for formal ethical approval was waived. This study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the research. Participants were thoroughly informed about the study’s objectives, methodologies, potential risks, and their right to withdraw from participation at any time without consequences. Confidentiality and privacy of participants were maintained throughout the study, in line with ethical guidelines.

: Not applicable.

: The authors declare no competing interests.

Document is current

Any future updates will be listed below