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.

43/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Four main themes and 10 subthemes were identified. Main themes were (1) communications to identify pain in people with dementia, (2) pain assessment in people with dementia, (3) pain management strategies, and (4) training in pain and dementia care. Healthcare professionals and family carers reported challenges in pain identification. People with dementia also mentioned their pain being unrecognised by carers. Facilitators included familiarity and communication with people with dementia and family carers. Non-verbal cues and unusual behaviours were commonly used to identify pain, and a personalised pain assessment approach was highlighted. Non-pharmacological strategies were used as the first-line therapy to manage pain. However, a lack of knowledge and training in pain and dementia care indicated the need for a training program (e.g., a self-paced online short course). Pain assessment and management in people with dementia is challenging, primarily due to communication barriers and a lack of skill training. Formal pain assessment and management training and efficient, easy-to-use pain assessment tools are needed to address this. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Limited communication capacity in people with dementia and lack of training in carers are key challenges regarding pain assessment and management in people with dementia. Improved training in communication, pain assessment, and management skills may help to address these challenges. IMPACT: This study addressed a lack of knowledge and skills for healthcare professionals and family carers in effective pain assessment and management in people with dementia. Collaborative communication among different stakeholders and skills training may overcome the challenges and barriers. REPORTING

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

APA 7th

Pu, L., Barton, M., Gamage, M. W. K., Okada, M., Todorovic, M., & Moyle, W. (2025). Pain Assessment and Management in Dementia Care: Qualitative Perspectives of People With Dementia, Their Families, and Healthcare Professionals. Journal of Clinical Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17771

Vancouver

Pu L, Barton M, Gamage MWK, Okada M, Todorovic M, Moyle W. Pain Assessment and Management in Dementia Care: Qualitative Perspectives of People With Dementia, Their Families, and Healthcare Professionals. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 2025. doi:10.1111/jocn.17771. PMID: 40200556.

BibTeX

@article{pu2025-40200556,
  author  = {Pu, Lihui and Barton, Matthew and Gamage, Madushika Wishvanie Kodagoda and Okada, Mari and Todorovic, Michael and Moyle, Wendy},
  title   = {{Pain Assessment and Management in Dementia Care: Qualitative Perspectives of People With Dementia, Their Families, and Healthcare Professionals}},
  journal = {Journal of Clinical Nursing},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1111/jocn.17771},
  pmid    = {40200556},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17771}
}

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: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
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 low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. 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

Four main themes and 10 subthemes were identified.
Main themes were (1) communications to identify pain in people with dementia, (2) pain assessment in people with dementia, (3) pain management strategies, and (4) training in pain and dementia care.
Healthcare professionals and family carers reported challenges in pain identification.
People with dementia also mentioned their pain being unrecognised by carers.
Facilitators included familiarity and communication with people with dementia and family carers.

Why it matters

In interviews with people with dementia, their families, and healthcare professionals, pain was often not recognized because of communication barriers and a lack of training in carers. The authors call for formal training and easy-to-use pain assessment tools.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 43/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Clinical Nursing)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Journal of Clinical Nursing: journal h-index 174 (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	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 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	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	2 / 7	Cited 10 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	3.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 11.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 10 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Wendy Moyle: h-index 62 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Erasmus MC: institution h-index 1,321 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 3 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40200556)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	43 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

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

Related studies in Caregiving 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 Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →