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.

36/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Purpose of review Agitation and aggression commonly arise in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias. They are distressing for the individual and often confer risk to them and to others, as well as raising significant clinical challenges. This review outlines the current evidence for pharmacological and nonpharmacological approaches to the treatment of agitation and aggression in these patients. Recent findings There is a growing body of literature supporting the use of nonpharmacological approaches as well as the treatment of pain as a first-line management strategy prior to psychopharmacotherapy. Antipsychotic medications are most commonly prescribed to address agitation and aggression. Evidence indicates this approach results in a modest but significant improvement in aggression in the short term (6-12 weeks) although the impact on other symptoms of agitation is limited. There is less positive evidence to support their use in the longer term, and prescriptions of more than 12 weeks and longer periods of prescription are associated with cumulative risk of severe adverse events, including death. Suggested pharmacological alternatives with the most promising preliminary evidence include memantine, carbamazepine, citalopram, and prazosin, but none of these agents have sufficient evidence in treating agitation and aggression to recommend use in routine clinical practice. Summary Currently, the best approach for managing these symptoms is within a framework of good practice that promotes prevention, monitoring and the use of nonpharmacological alternatives, with judicious short-term use of antipsychotics, when appropriate.

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

APA 7th

Ballard, C., & Corbett, A. (2013). Agitation and aggression in people with Alzheimer's disease. Current opinion in psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1097/yco.0b013e32835f414b

Vancouver

Ballard C, Corbett A. Agitation and aggression in people with Alzheimer's disease. Current opinion in psychiatry. 2013. doi:10.1097/yco.0b013e32835f414b. PMID: 23528917.

BibTeX

@article{ballard2013-23528917,
  author  = {Ballard, C. and Corbett, A.},
  title   = {{Agitation and aggression in people with Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Current opinion in psychiatry},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1097/yco.0b013e32835f414b},
  pmid    = {23528917},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1097/yco.0b013e32835f414b}
}

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: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
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

They are distressing for the individual and often confer risk to them and to others, as well as raising significant clinical challenges.
Evidence indicates this approach results in a modest but significant improvement in aggression in the short term (6-12 weeks) although the impact on other symptoms of agitation is limited.
There is less positive evidence to support their use in the longer term, and prescriptions of more than 12 weeks and longer periods of prescription are associated with cumulative risk of severe adverse events, including death.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 36/100

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. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current opinion in psychiatry)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
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	1 / 5	2013 — within 20 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	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23528917)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	21 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100.
Total	36 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

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

Related studies in Treatments from nearby years

Also tagged “aggression”

2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “aggression”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →