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 56 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objectives This study assessed frequency of caregiver identification and needs of a sample of persons with dementia (PWDs) and their caregivers to determine whether needs were addressed and whether documentation increased with growing levels of self-reported relationship problems and burden. Design Cross-sectional design using data from electronic medical record (EMR) review and baseline research assessments (Burden Interview and Mutuality Scale). Items from a caregiver assessment tool were used to identify documentation of important factors in clinical guidelines. Setting Michael E. Debakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX. Participants A total of 211 PWDs from a randomized controlled trial testing a psychosocial intervention for preventing aggression in PWDs. Measurements EMRs for 12 months before participation in the original study were abstracted, using a tool created by the authors to assess documentation of information deemed important to caregiver assessment in clinical guidelines (eg, caregiver needs, caregiver well-being, and caregiving context). The first two authors reviewed the EMRs, adjusting the tool, based on questions that arose. Results Of 211 EMRs of PWDs reviewed, 177 (89%) identified caregivers. Of these, 88% identified the caregiver by name or relation to the PWD, 28% assessed caregiver well-being, and 41% assessed caregiver needs. All EMRs assessing caregiver needs showed provision of caregiver support (including psychoeducation, skills training, or referrals for additional aid). Levels of self-reported caregiver burden were not associated with documentation of assessment; however, higher levels of self-reported relationship problems were positively associated with increased caregiver contact documentation and negatively associated with caregiver need documentation and Alzheimer Association referrals. Conclusion Healthcare providers identified caregivers in most of the sample, but less than 50% assessed their well-being and needs. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1604-1609, 2019.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study reviewed medical records of 211 veterans with dementia and found that caregiver well-being and needs were assessed in only a minority of cases. It highlights gaps in caregiver assessment in clinical practice, not a treatment for Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 56/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited 2 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 1 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 56 of 100.56 of 100 points earned44 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 Journal of the American Geriatrics Society: journal h-index 344 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 211 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 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited 2 / 7 Cited 6 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.7 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019
Impact for its field and year 1 / 6 Cited 0.4× 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 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Mark E. Kunik: h-index 63 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 Baylor College of Medicine: institution h-index 1,607 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31002403)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 56 / 100 —

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

Read the original

May need a subscription Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 10 Oct 2026), 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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Davis, M. L., Hendrickson, J., Wilson, N., Shrestha, S., Amspoker, A. B., & Kunik, M. (2019). Taking Care of the Dyad: Frequency of Caregiver Assessment Among Veterans with Dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15882

Vancouver

Davis ML, Hendrickson J, Wilson N, Shrestha S, Amspoker AB, Kunik M. Taking Care of the Dyad: Frequency of Caregiver Assessment Among Veterans with Dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2019. doi:10.1111/jgs.15882. PMID: 31002403.

BibTeX

@article{davis2019-31002403,
  author  = {Davis, M. L. and Hendrickson, J. and Wilson, N. and Shrestha, S. and Amspoker, A. B. and Kunik, M.},
  title   = {{Taking Care of the Dyad: Frequency of Caregiver Assessment Among Veterans with Dementia}},
  journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1111/jgs.15882},
  pmid    = {31002403},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15882}
}

Studies this one cites

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

Related studies in Treatments

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 Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →