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 66 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

Background The objective of this study was to assess the responsiveness of the Minimum Data Set Activities of Daily Living (MDS-ADL) Scale to change over time by examining the change in physical function in adults with moderate to severe dementia with no comorbid illness who had been resident in a nursing home for over 90 days. Methods Longitudinal data were collected on nursing home residents with moderate (n = 7001) or severe (n = 4616) dementia in one US state from the US national Minimum Data Set (MDS). Severity of dementia was determined by the MDS Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS). Physical function was assessed by summing the seven items (bed mobility, transfer, locomotion, dressing, eating, toilet use, personal hygiene) on the MDS activities of daily living (ADL) Long Form scale. Mean change over time of MDS-ADL scores were estimated at three and six months for residents with moderate (CPS score of 3) and severe (CPS score of 4 or 5) dementia. Results Physical function in residents with moderate cognitive impairment deteriorated over six months by an average of 1.78 points on the MDS-ADL Long Form scale, while those with severe cognitive impairment declined by an average of 1.70 points. Approximately one quarter of residents in both groups showed some improvement in physical function over the six month period. Residents with moderate cognitive impairment experienced the greatest deterioration in early-loss and mid-loss ADL items (personal hygiene, dressing, toilet use) and residents with severe cognitive impairment showed the greatest deterioration in activities related to eating, a late loss ADL. Conclusion The MDS-ADL Long Form scale detected clinically meaningful change in physical function in a large cohort of long-stay nursing home residents with moderate to severe dementia, supporting its use as a research tool in future studies.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 66/100
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 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 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 2 of 2. 38 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 66 of 100. Total 66 of 100.38 of the 58 points we could judge = 66 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for effect reported 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 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC geriatrics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 7 / 12 A longitudinal study following the same 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 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 3 / 4 7,001 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 16584565)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 38 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100.
Total 66 / 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

Carpenter, G. I., Hastie, C. L., Morris, J. N., Fries, B. E., & Ankri, J. (2006). Measuring change in activities of daily living in nursing home residents with moderate to severe cognitive impairment. BMC geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-6-7

Vancouver

Carpenter GI, Hastie CL, Morris JN, Fries BE, Ankri J. Measuring change in activities of daily living in nursing home residents with moderate to severe cognitive impairment. BMC geriatrics. 2006. doi:10.1186/1471-2318-6-7. PMID: 16584565.

BibTeX

@article{carpenter2006-16584565,
  author  = {Carpenter, G. I. and Hastie, C. L. and Morris, J. N. and Fries, B. E. and Ankri, J.},
  title   = {{Measuring change in activities of daily living in nursing home residents with moderate to severe cognitive impairment}},
  journal = {BMC geriatrics},
  year    = {2006},
  doi     = {10.1186/1471-2318-6-7},
  pmid    = {16584565},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-6-7}
}

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also tagged “assisted-living”

199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →