Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in the elderly has a different clinical presentation than CAP in other age groups. Confusion, alteration of functional physical capacity, and decompensation of underlying illnesses may appear as unique manifestations. Malnutrition is also an associated feature of CAP in this population. We undertook a study to assess the clinical and nutritional aspects of CAP requiring hospitalization in elderly patients (over 65 yr of age). One hundred and one patients with pneumonia, consecutively admitted to a 1,000-bed teaching hospital over an 8-mo period, were studied (age: 78 +/- 8 yr, mean +/- SD). Nutritional aspects and the mental status of patients with pneumonia were compared with those of a control population (n = 101) matched for gender, age, and date of hospitalization. The main symptoms were dyspnea (n = 71), cough (n = 67), and fever (n = 64). The association of these symptoms with CAP was observed in only 32 patients. The most common associated conditions were cardiac disease (n = 38) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n = 30). Seventy-seven (76%) episodes of pneumonia were clinically classified as typical and 24 as atypical. There was no association between the type of isolated microorganism and the clinical presentation of CAP, except for pleuritic chest pain, which was more common in pneumonia episodes caused by classical microorganisms (p = 0.02). This was confirmed by a multivariate analysis (relative risk [RR] = 11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7 to 65; p = 0.0099). The prevalence of chronic dementia was similar in the pneumonia cohort (n = 25) and control group (n = 18) (p = 0.22). However, delirium or acute confusion were significantly more frequent in the pneumonia cohort than in controls (45 versus 29 episodes; p = 0.019). Only 16 patients with pneumonia were considered to be well nourished, as compared with 47 control patients (p = 0.001). Kwashiorkor-like malnutrition was the predominant type of malnutrition (n = 65; 70%) in the pneumonia patients as compared with the control patients (n = 31; 31%) (p = 0.001). The observed mortality was 26% (n = 26). Pleuritic chest pain is the only clinical symptom that can guide an empiric therapeutic strategy in CAP (typical versus atypical pneumonia). Both delirium and malnutrition were very common clinical manifestations of CAP in our study population.

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

APA 7th

Riquelme, R., Torres, A., el-Ebiary, M., Mensa, J., Estruch, R., Ruiz, M., et al. (1997). Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly. Clinical and nutritional aspects. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.156.6.9702005

Vancouver

Riquelme R, Torres A, el-Ebiary M, Mensa J, Estruch R, Ruiz M, et al. Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly. Clinical and nutritional aspects. American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine. 1997. doi:10.1164/ajrccm.156.6.9702005. PMID: 9412574.

BibTeX

@article{riquelme1997-9412574,
  author  = {Riquelme, R. and Torres, A. and el-Ebiary, M. and Mensa, J. and Estruch, R. and Ruiz, M. and Angrill, J. and Soler, N.},
  title   = {{Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly. Clinical and nutritional aspects}},
  journal = {American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine},
  year    = {1997},
  doi     = {10.1164/ajrccm.156.6.9702005},
  pmid    = {9412574},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.156.6.9702005}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 28 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.28 of the 58 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine)
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 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 1997 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 2 / 4 101 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation 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
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 9412574)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 28 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 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 Clinical safety

Also tagged “palliative”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →