Funding for this research was provided by:
Received: 8 May 2020
Accepted: 3 December 2020
First Online: 16 December 2020
Ethics approval and consent to participate
: The KUPA project was approved by the Regional Ethics Review Board in Lund, Sweden (reference number: 2015/4). The study was guided by ethical principles for medical research in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki [CitationRef removed], and conducted in accordance with the Swedish Ethical Review of Research Involving Humans Act [CitationRef removed] and the General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR] [CitationRef removed].Prior to the interviews and before the participants sign the written consent form, the participants were given verbal and written information about the study. Written consent was obtained from participants. Participation was voluntary and could be interrupted at any time without the participants having to give a reason and without any consequences. Since the sample consisted of a vulnerable group i.e. frail older persons various efforts were made to minimize the risk of unintentional harm. First, the selection of older persons was made based upon the contact person’s knowledge of the older person and his/her ability to manage an interview lasting for about 1 h. Second, the researchers were observant if the older person got tired during the interview and offered to interrupt the interview and come back another day. Third, the researchers were also observant to signs of depressed mood or anxiety during the interview, and in those cases immediately contacted the older persons’ contact person at the nursing home, who in turn could ask for counselling from nurses or physicians. Fourth, weekly meetings were held during the data collection period within the research group, led by the experienced project manager. Difficulties identified in an interview situation were discussed and managed from the ethic principle of non-maleficence. Furthermore, to maintain the principle of non-maleficence, the participants were guaranteed confidentiality i.e. the collected data were encoded so that individuals could not be identified. Only the codes were used during the analysis, and the findings were reported at a group level. The code lists were stored in locked cabinets apart from the interviews. To create an environment as beneficial as possible for the participants, the participants themselves chose the time and place for the interviews.
: Not applicable.
: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.