Home › Research › End-of-life care
Comorbidity in dementia: update of an ongoing autopsy study
Magaki S, Yong WH, Khanlou N, Tung S, Vinters HV.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2014-07-15
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objectives To examine systemic and central nervous system (CNS) comorbidities of individuals with dementia evaluated during general autopsy. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting A large tertiary academic medical center in Los Angeles, California. Participants Individuals with clinically and neuropathologically diagnosed dementia who received complete autopsies (n = 86) and individuals with dementia who received partial (brain only) autopsies (n = 132). Measurements Information on cause of death and systemic and CNS comorbidities was obtained from autopsy reports and clinical information as available from the medical records. Findings were tabulated with respect to type of dementia, semiquantitative assessment of the severity of cerebral amyloid angiopathy, semiquantitative assessment of the severity of cerebrovascular disease, and evidence of ischemic damage in the brain. Results Of 218 subjects with dementia, 175 (80.3%) had Alzheimer's disease alone or in combination with other lesions that might contribute to cognitive impairment, such as cerebrovascular disease and diffuse Lewy body disease (DLBD), 14 (6.4%) had frontotemporal dementia, and seven (3.2%) had isolated DLBD. The most common cause of death in participants with dementia was pneumonia (n = 57, 66.3%), followed by cardiovascular disease (n = 14, 16.3%). Eighteen subjects (20.9%) had lung disease, and 16 (18.6%) had evidence of an old or recent myocardial infarction. Clinically undiagnosed neoplasms included colonic adenocarcinoma, metastatic pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma, meningioma, and Schwannoma. Conclusion Significant comorbidities were discovered at autopsy in individuals with dementia. Understanding the causes of death and associated comorbidities in individuals with various subtypes of dementia is important in the assessment of end-of-life care in these individuals.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Magaki, S., Yong, W. H., Khanlou, N., Tung, S., & Vinters, H. V. (2014). Comorbidity in dementia: update of an ongoing autopsy study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.12977
Vancouver
Magaki S, Yong WH, Khanlou N, Tung S, Vinters HV. Comorbidity in dementia: update of an ongoing autopsy study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2014. doi:10.1111/jgs.12977. PMID: 25039832.
BibTeX
@article{magaki2014-25039832,
author = {Magaki, S. and Yong, W. H. and Khanlou, N. and Tung, S. and Vinters, H. V.},
title = {{Comorbidity in dementia: update of an ongoing autopsy study}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1111/jgs.12977},
pmid = {25039832},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.12977}
}
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.
Key findings
- Results Of 218 subjects with dementia, 175 (80.3%) had Alzheimer's disease alone or in combination with other lesions that might contribute to cognitive impairment, such as cerebrovascular disease and diffuse Lewy body disease (DLBD), 14 (6.4%) had frontotemporal dementia, and seven (3.2%) had isolated DLBD.
- Conclusion Significant comorbidities were discovered at autopsy in individuals with dementia.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Participants86
- Effect size80.3%; 6.4%; 3.2%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 62/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for 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 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| 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 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 86 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 25039832) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 36 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 62 out of 100. |
| Total | 62 / 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.
Related studies in End-of-life care
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.