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 67 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

Background Despite the importance of functional status to older persons and their families, little is known about the course of disability at the end of life. Methods We evaluated data on 383 decedents from a longitudinal study involving 754 community-dwelling older persons. None of the subjects had disability in essential activities of daily living at the beginning of the study, and the level of disability was ascertained during monthly interviews for more than 10 years. Information on the conditions leading to death was obtained from death certificates and comprehensive assessments that were completed at 18-month intervals after the baseline assessment. Results In the last year of life, five distinct trajectories were identified, from no disability to the most severe disability: 65 subjects had no disability (17.0%), 76 had catastrophic disability (19.8%), 67 had accelerated disability (17.5%), 91 had progressive disability (23.8%), and 84 had persistently severe disability (21.9%). The most common condition leading to death was frailty (in 107 subjects [27.9%]), followed by organ failure (in 82 subjects [21.4%]), cancer (in 74 subjects [19.3%]), other causes (in 57 subjects [14.9%]), advanced dementia (in 53 subjects [13.8%]), and sudden death (in 10 subjects [2.6%]). When the distribution of the disability trajectories was evaluated according to the conditions leading to death, a predominant trajectory was observed only for subjects who died from advanced dementia (67.9% of these subjects had a trajectory of persistently severe disability) and sudden death (50.0% of these subjects had no disability). For the four other conditions leading to death, no more than 34% of the subjects had any of the disability trajectories. The distribution of disability trajectories was particularly heterogeneous among the subjects with organ failure (from 12.2 to 32.9% of the subjects followed a specific trajectory) and frailty (from 14.0 to 27.1% of the subjects followed a specific trajectory). Conclusions In most of the decedents, the course of disability in the last year of life did not follow a predictable pattern based on the condition leading to death.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 67/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 10 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 1 of 4; Effect reported 2 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 0 of 2. 39 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 67 of 100. Total 67 of 100.39 of the 58 points we could judge = 67 of 100

Published in a top-tier journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for 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 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 10 / 10 Tier 1 — top-tier general journal (The New England journal of medicine)
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 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 65 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 20357280)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 39 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100.
Total 67 / 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

Gill, T. M., Gahbauer, E. A., Han, L., & Allore, H. G. (2010). Trajectories of disability in the last year of life. The New England journal of medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0909087

Vancouver

Gill TM, Gahbauer EA, Han L, Allore HG. Trajectories of disability in the last year of life. The New England journal of medicine. 2010. doi:10.1056/nejmoa0909087. PMID: 20357280.

BibTeX

@article{gill2010-20357280,
  author  = {Gill, T. M. and Gahbauer, E. A. and Han, L. and Allore, H. G.},
  title   = {{Trajectories of disability in the last year of life}},
  journal = {The New England journal of medicine},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1056/nejmoa0909087},
  pmid    = {20357280},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0909087}
}

Related studies in End-of-life care

Also in End-of-life care

116 studies in the library are filed under End-of-life care with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The End-of-life care hub.

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →