Home › Research › End-of-life care
Transitional care needs of persons with dementia and their care partners: a secondary analysis using Transitions Theory
Li C, Wang WG, LoVerde K, Murali KP.. medRxiv, 2026-06-29
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Persons with dementia (PWD) and their care partners experience multidimensional care transitions across the illness trajectory. Care transitions interventions often center the experience of transfer between healthcare settings and depend on specialized services, which limits incorporation into standard routine care. This study examined the transitional care needs of PWD and care partners using Transitions Theory to inform transitional care interventions, especially for hospice care transitions. This is a secondary qualitative directed content analysis. Data were coded using Transitions Theory concepts, analyzed using framework analysis, including data familiarization, framework identification, indexing, charting, and interpretation. Participants (n=20) with an average age 53 were mostly female children care partners (80%, n=16) of PWD identifying as Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, or White. Five themes were identified: (1) “They change and you taking the role now of the parent”: Multiplicity and complexity of transitions, identifying overlapping developmental, health-illness, situational, and organizational transitions; (2) Transitions occur in unanticipated ways, reflecting variable awareness and unpredictable illness trajectories; (3) Challenging transition conditions, including personal, community, and systemic factors; (4) Challenging decision making in transitions, highlighting care partners’ uncertainty and moral distress making ongoing decisions; and (5) Critical supports for healthy transitions, identifying guidance, care network, psychosocial well-being, and community resources as critical for transitions. Transitional care in dementia is characterized by multiplicity and unpredictability of transitions. When tailored transitional care guidance is lacking, care partners must take on significant responsibility for finding information and making decisions. Transitional care interventions that integrate anticipatory guidance, care planning facilitation, psychosocial support, and community linkage are critical to addressing these needs.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Li, C., Wang, W. G., LoVerde, K., & Murali, K. P. (2026). Transitional care needs of persons with dementia and their care partners: a secondary analysis using Transitions Theory. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.24.26356479
Vancouver
Li C, Wang WG, LoVerde K, Murali KP. Transitional care needs of persons with dementia and their care partners: a secondary analysis using Transitions Theory. medRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.06.24.26356479.
BibTeX
@article{li2026-3589e3b0,
author = {Li, C. and Wang, W. G. and LoVerde, K. and Murali, K. P.},
title = {{Transitional care needs of persons with dementia and their care partners: a secondary analysis using Transitions Theory}},
journal = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.06.24.26356479},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.24.26356479}
}
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.
Key findings
- When tailored transitional care guidance is lacking, care partners must take on significant responsibility for finding information and making decisions.
Study details
- Participants20
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 27 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 17 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 27 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| 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 | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 20 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 | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 17 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 17 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 27 out of 100. |
| Total | 27 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in End-of-life care
Also tagged “caregiver”
195 studies in the library carry the topic tag “caregiver”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 195 tagged studies.