Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

This trial showed the intervention had no difference in living at home at 6 months compared with admission to hospital, while costs were lower across NHS and personal and social services.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Sasha Shepperd 1,*, Andrea Cradduck-Bamford 1, Christopher Butler 2, Graham Ellis 3, Mary Godfrey 4,, Alastair Gray 1, Anthony Hemsley 5, Pradeep Khanna 6, Peter Langhorne 7, Petra Mäkelä 8, Sam Mort 2, Scott Ramsay 9, Rebekah Schiff 10, Surya Singh 1, Susan Smith 2, David J Stott 7, Apostolos Tsiachristas 1, Angela Wilkinson 11, Ly-Mee Yu 2, John Young 12

1 Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
2 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
3 School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK
4 Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Academic Unit of Ageing and Stroke Research, Leeds, UK
5 Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK
6 Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, Newport, UK
7 Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
8 Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
9 Department of Medicine for the Elderly, St John’s Hospital, Livingston, UK
10 Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
11 Medicine for the Elderly Department, Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, UK
12 Academic Unit of Elderly Care and Rehabilitation, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
* Corresponding author Email:

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} . {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.


Responses to this report

No responses have been published.


If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions