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.

71/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Background Dementia is a life-limiting condition that affects 50 million people globally. Existing definitions of end of life do not account for the uncertain trajectory of dementia. People living with dementia may live in the advanced stage for several years, or even die before they reach the advanced stage of dementia. Aim To identify how end of life in people with dementia is measured and conceptualised, and to identify the factors that contribute towards identifying end of life in people with dementia. Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Data sources Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and CINAHL, were searched in April 2020. Eligible studies included adults with any dementia diagnosis, family carers and healthcare professionals caring for people with dementia and a definition for end of life in dementia. Results Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Various cut-off scores from validated tools, estimated prognoses and descriptive definitions were used to define end of life. Most studies used single measure tools which focused on cognition or function. There was no pattern across care settings in how end of life was defined. Healthcare professionals and family carers had difficulty recognising when people with dementia were approaching the end of life. Conclusion End-of-life care and research that focuses only on cognitive and functional decline may fail to recognise the complexities and unmet needs relevant to dementia and end of life. Research and clinical practice should adopt a needs-based approach for people with dementia and not define end of life by stage of disease.

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

APA 7th

Browne, B., Kupeli, N., Moore, K. J., Sampson, E. L., & Davies, N. (2021). Defining end of life in dementia: A systematic review. Palliative medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163211025457

Vancouver

Browne B, Kupeli N, Moore KJ, Sampson EL, Davies N. Defining end of life in dementia: A systematic review. Palliative medicine. 2021. doi:10.1177/02692163211025457. PMID: 34137314.

BibTeX

@article{browne2021-34137314,
  author  = {Browne, B. and Kupeli, N. and Moore, K. J. and Sampson, E. L. and Davies, N.},
  title   = {{Defining end of life in dementia: A systematic review}},
  journal = {Palliative medicine},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1177/02692163211025457},
  pmid    = {34137314},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163211025457}
}

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 pooled review. It combines earlier studies, so it is only as good as the studies it pools. Check how many were included, whether they were similar enough to combine, and whether the authors report inconsistency between them.
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 high. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. High means the abstract mentions a randomized design, a meta-analysis or a systematic review. 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

Results Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria.

Study details

Study designsystematic review
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 71/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 71 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Palliative medicine)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	12 / 12	A systematic review of all the studies on the question
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	3 / 5	2021 — within 6 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	A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here
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 34137314)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	41 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 71 out of 100.
Total	71 / 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 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 →