Home › Research › Caregiving
Dementia in Women
Todd M Derreberry, Suzanne Holroyd. The Psychiatric clinics of North America, 2017-03-06
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Despite the progress made in the understanding of the etiology, neuropathophysiology, and treatment of different types of dementia, such disorders continue to pose huge health problems worldwide. The differential effect of the burden of disease on women is just being realized. These effects range from direct effects of the disease processes themselves, the way women experience the disease, and the caregiver burden. This article provides a brief overview of the available information on this topic.
Key findings
- Despite the progress made in the understanding of the etiology, neuropathophysiology, and treatment of different types of dementia, such disorders continue to pose huge health problems worldwide.
- The differential effect of the burden of disease on women is just being realized.
- These effects range from direct effects of the disease processes themselves, the way women experience the disease, and the caregiver burden.
- This article provides a brief overview of the available information on this topic.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 39/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Psychiatric clinics of North America) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 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) |
| 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 28477654) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 22 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100. |
| Total | 39 / 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Derreberry, T. M., & Holroyd, S. (2017). Dementia in Women. The Psychiatric clinics of North America. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2017.01.006
Vancouver
Derreberry TM, Holroyd S. Dementia in Women. The Psychiatric clinics of North America. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.psc.2017.01.006. PMID: 28477654.
BibTeX
@article{derreberry2017-28477654,
author = {Derreberry, Todd M and Holroyd, Suzanne},
title = {{Dementia in Women}},
journal = {The Psychiatric clinics of North America},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1016/j.psc.2017.01.006},
pmid = {28477654},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psc.2017.01.006}
}