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 46 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background We identified the need to develop a scientifically rigorous measure of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in dementia that would be appropriate for use at all stages of dementia severity and would be available in both self- and proxy-report versions. Method We used standard psychometric methods to eliminate items with poor psychometric properties (item-reduction field test) and to assess the acceptability, reliability and validity of the item-reduced instruments (psychometric evaluation field test). We developed and validated two versions of DEMQOL: a 28-item interviewer-administered questionnaire that is self-reported by the person with dementia (DEMQOL) and a 31-item interviewer-administered questionnaire that is proxy-reported by a caregiver (DEMQOL-Proxy). Results DEMQOL shows high reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) and moderate validity in people with mild/moderate dementia. DEMQOL-Proxy shows good acceptability and internal consistency and moderate evidence of validity in people with mild/moderate and severe dementia. Test-retest reliability and performance in people with severe dementia need further testing. Conclusions DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy show psychometric properties that are comparable with the best available dementia-specific measures of HRQL. We recommend that DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy are used together. Reliability and validity need to be confirmed in independent samples and responsiveness needs to be evaluated.

Key findings

Why it matters

This paper built DEMQOL, a 28-item questionnaire answered by the person with dementia, and DEMQOL-Proxy, a 31-item version answered by a caregiver, to measure health-related quality of life, and recommends using them together. The authors report the self-report version as reliable with moderate validity in mild-to-moderate dementia, and the proxy version as acceptable with moderate validity up to severe dementia. They say the results still need confirming in independent samples and that whether scores pick up change over time was not tested, so it is a measurement tool, not evidence that any treatment works.

Study details

How this study scored 46/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 5 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 4 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 46 of 100.46 of 100 points earned54 not earned

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.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Psychological medicine)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 Psychological Medicine: journal h-index 331 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 2007 — 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)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 5 / 7 Cited 285 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 13.6 citations a year over 21 year(s) since 2007
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 2.5× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 2 / 6 Cited by 9 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 53 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 4 / 4 Last-listed author Martin Richard John Knapp: h-index 120 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 King's College London: institution h-index 1,348 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 17176501)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 46 / 100 —

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

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

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. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Smith, S. C., Lamping, D. L., Banerjee, S., Harwood, R. H., Foley, B., Smith, P., et al. (2007). Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL. Psychological medicine. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291706009469

Vancouver

Smith SC, Lamping DL, Banerjee S, Harwood RH, Foley B, Smith P, et al. Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL. Psychological medicine. 2007. doi:10.1017/s0033291706009469. PMID: 17176501.

BibTeX

@article{smith2007-17176501,
  author  = {Smith, S. C. and Lamping, D. L. and Banerjee, S. and Harwood, R. H. and Foley, B. and Smith, P. and Cook, J. C. and Murray, J. and others},
  title   = {{Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL}},
  journal = {Psychological medicine},
  year    = {2007},
  doi     = {10.1017/s0033291706009469},
  pmid    = {17176501},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291706009469}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

9 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Caregiving

Also tagged “care”

996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →