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 57 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Objectives To examine the rates of and risk factors for acute hospitalization in a prospective cohort of older community-dwelling patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Design Longitudinal patient registry. Setting AD research center. Participants Eight hundred twenty-seven older persons with AD. Measurements Acute hospitalization after AD research center visit was determined from a Medicare database. Risk factor variables included demographics, dementia-related, comorbidity and diagnoses and were measured in interviews and according to Medicare data. Results Of the 827 eligible patients seen at the ADRC during 1991 to 2006 (median follow-up 3.0 years), 542 (66%) were hospitalized at least once, and 389 (47%) were hospitalized two or more times, with a median of 3 days spent in the hospital per person-year. Leading reasons for admission were syncope or falls (26%), ischemic heart disease (17%), gastrointestinal disease (9%), pneumonia (6%), and delirium (5%). Five significant independent risk factors for hospitalization were higher comorbidity (hazard ratio (HR)=1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.57-2.23), previous acute hospitalization (HR=1.65, 95% CI=1.37-1.99), older age (HR=1.51, 95% CI=1.26-1.81), male sex (HR=1.27, 95% CI=1.04-1.54), and shorter duration of dementia symptoms (HR=1.26, 95% CI=1.02-1.56). Cumulative risk of hospitalization increased with number of risk factors present at baseline: 38% with zero factors, 57% with one factor, 70% with two or three factors, and 85% with four or five factors (P(trend) <.001). Conclusion In a community-dwelling population with generally mild AD, hospitalization is frequent, occurring in two-thirds of participants over a median follow-up time of 3 years. With these results, clinicians may be able to identify dementia patients at high risk for hospitalization.

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

APA 7th

Rudolph, J. L., Zanin, N. M., Jones, R. N., Marcantonio, E. R., Fong, T. G., Yang, F. M., et al. (2010). Hospitalization in community-dwelling persons with Alzheimer's disease: frequency and causes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02924.x

Vancouver

Rudolph JL, Zanin NM, Jones RN, Marcantonio ER, Fong TG, Yang FM, et al. Hospitalization in community-dwelling persons with Alzheimer's disease: frequency and causes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2010. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02924.x. PMID: 20553338.

BibTeX

@article{rudolph2010-20553338,
  author  = {Rudolph, J. L. and Zanin, N. M. and Jones, R. N. and Marcantonio, E. R. and Fong, T. G. and Yang, F. M. and Yap, L. and Inouye, S. K.},
  title   = {{Hospitalization in community-dwelling persons with Alzheimer's disease: frequency and causes}},
  journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02924.x},
  pmid    = {20553338},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02924.x}
}

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 57/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 0 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. 33 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 57 of 100. Total 57 of 100.33 of the 58 points we could judge = 57 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a prospective cohort study, followed forward from enrollment. Scored zero for sample size, 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
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 prospective cohort study, followed forward from enrollment
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 2010 — 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 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
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 20553338)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 33 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100.
Total 57 / 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 in Clinical safety

96 studies in the library are filed under Clinical safety with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Clinical safety hub.

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →