This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

30/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Six key themes were identified: Inadequate preparation, guidance and access to appropriate resources; Taboo and misunderstanding: talking about death; Dementia as a terminal illness and the role of palliative care; Key time points, critical events and decisions; Planning ahead not in reality; Family issues and dynamics. From clinicians' and service providers' perspectives, problems related to limited resources, poor consumer access, and skilled workforce shortages all undermined efforts to enable living and dying at home. Family carers found that conversations about death and care home admission were "too confronting" for many, hampering planning in advance. A lack of public, community and health professional awareness led to suboptimal end-of-life planning, signaling the need for all health professionals, especially community and primary care practitioners to be knowledgeable in dementia care. Addressing unique challenges that people with advanced dementia and their family carers experience requires continuity of care and coordination of multidisciplinary care services. Further research is needed to identify dementia-appropriate policies, for example adaptation of current models of advance care planning to meet the needs of this population.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This qualitative inquiry identified themes including inadequate preparation and resources, taboo around talking about death, and that planning ahead was 'not in reality' for families. It found that limited resources, poor access, and workforce shortages undermined efforts to enable living and dying at home, and calls for dementia-appropriate policies and adapted advance care planning.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Jeon, Y., & McKenzie, H. A. (2026). A qualitative inquiry about end-of-life care for people with advanced dementia: “Planning ahead not in reality”. Geriatric Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.103975

Vancouver

Jeon Y, McKenzie HA. A qualitative inquiry about end-of-life care for people with advanced dementia: “Planning ahead not in reality”. Geriatric Nursing. 2026. doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.103975. PMID: 41763155.

BibTeX

@article{jeon2026-41763155,
  author  = {Jeon, Yun‐Hee and McKenzie, Heather A.},
  title   = {{A qualitative inquiry about end-of-life care for people with advanced dementia: “Planning ahead not in reality”}},
  journal = {Geriatric Nursing},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.103975},
  pmid    = {41763155},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2026.103975}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Six key themes were identified: Inadequate preparation, guidance and access to appropriate resources; Taboo and misunderstanding: talking about death; Dementia as a terminal illness and the role of palliative care; Key time points, critical events and decisions; Planning ahead not in reality; Family issues and dynamics.
From clinicians' and service providers' perspectives, problems related to limited resources, poor consumer access, and skilled workforce shortages all undermined efforts to enable living and dying at home.
Family carers found that conversations about death and care home admission were "too confronting" for many, hampering planning in advance.
A lack of public, community and health professional awareness led to suboptimal end-of-life planning, signaling the need for all health professionals, especially community and primary care practitioners to be knowledgeable in dementia care.
Addressing unique challenges that people with advanced dementia and their family carers experience requires continuity of care and coordination of multidisciplinary care services.

Why it matters

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 30/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Geriatric Nursing)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Geriatric Nursing: journal h-index 78 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	5 / 5	2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	0 / 7	Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year	0 / 6	Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	1 / 4	Last-listed author Heather A. McKenzie: h-index 16 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	The University of Sydney: institution h-index 1,466 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	0 / 3	OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41763155)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	30 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in End-of-life care from nearby years

Also tagged “nursing”

995 studies in the library carry the topic tag “nursing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 995 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →