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 39 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

Alternative care environments for regular nursing homes are highly warranted to promote health and well-being of residents with dementia that are part of an age-friendly and dementia-friendly city and society. Insight is lacking on how to translate evidence-based knowledge from theory into a congruent conceptual model for innovation in current practice. This study reports on the co-creation of an alternative nursing home model in the Netherlands. A participatory research approach was used to co-create a conceptual framework with researchers, practitioners and older people following an iterative process. Results indicate that achieving positive outcomes for people with dementia, (in)formal caregivers, and the community is dependent on how well the physical, social and organizational environment are congruently designed. The theoretical underpinnings of the conceptual model have been translated into "the homestead," which is conceptualized around three main pillars: activation, freedom and relationships. The Homestead Care Model is an illustrative example of how residential care facilities can support the development of age-friendly communities that take into consideration the needs and requirements of older citizens. However, challenges remain to implement radical changes within residential care. More research is needed into the actual implementation of the Homestead Care Model.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 39/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 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 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 left out, no data. 22 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 39 of 100. Total 39 of 100.22 of the 56 points we could judge = 39 of 100

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. 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of environmental research and public health)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
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 2 / 5 2020 — within 10 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 — / 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 33374761)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 22 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100.
Total 39 / 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

de Boer, B., Bozdemir, B., Jansen, J., Hermans, M., Hamers, J. P. H., & Verbeek, H. (2020). The Homestead: Developing a Conceptual Framework through Co-Creation for Innovating Long-Term Dementia Care Environments. International journal of environmental research and public health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18010057

Vancouver

de Boer B, Bozdemir B, Jansen J, Hermans M, Hamers JPH, Verbeek H. The Homestead: Developing a Conceptual Framework through Co-Creation for Innovating Long-Term Dementia Care Environments. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020. doi:10.3390/ijerph18010057. PMID: 33374761.

BibTeX

@article{deboer2020-33374761,
  author  = {de Boer, Bram and Bozdemir, Belkis and Jansen, Jack and Hermans, Monique and Hamers, Jan P H and Verbeek, Hilde},
  title   = {{The Homestead: Developing a Conceptual Framework through Co-Creation for Innovating Long-Term Dementia Care Environments}},
  journal = {International journal of environmental research and public health},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.3390/ijerph18010057},
  pmid    = {33374761},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18010057}
}

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →