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.

36/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Recent years have seen a growing recognition that dementia is a terminal illness and that patients with advanced dementia nearing the end of life do not currently receive adequate palliative care. However, research into palliative care for these patients has thus far been limited. Furthermore, there has been little discussion in the literature regarding medication use in patients with advanced dementia who are nearing the end of life, and discontinuation of medication has not been well studied despite its potential to reduce the burden on the patient and to improve quality of life. There is limited, and sometimes contradictory, evidence available in the literature to guide evidence-based discontinuation of drugs such as acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, antipsychotic agents, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), antibacterials, antihypertensives, antihyperglycaemic drugs and anticoagulants. Furthermore, end-of-life care of patients with advanced dementia may be complicated by difficulties in accurately estimating life expectancy, ethical considerations regarding withholding or withdrawing treatment, and the wishes of the patient and/or their family. Significant research must be undertaken in the area of medication discontinuation in patients with advanced dementia nearing the end of life to determine how physicians currently decide whether medications should be discontinued, and also to develop the evidence base and provide guidance on systematic medication discontinuation.

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

APA 7th

Parsons, C., Hughes, C. M., Passmore, A. P., & Lapane, K. L. (2010). Withholding, discontinuing and withdrawing medications in dementia patients at the end of life: a neglected problem in the disadvantaged dying? Drugs & aging. https://doi.org/10.2165/11536760-000000000-00000

Vancouver

Parsons C, Hughes CM, Passmore AP, Lapane KL. Withholding, discontinuing and withdrawing medications in dementia patients at the end of life: a neglected problem in the disadvantaged dying? Drugs & aging. 2010. doi:10.2165/11536760-000000000-00000. PMID: 20524704.

BibTeX

@article{parsons2010-20524704,
  author  = {Parsons, C. and Hughes, C. M. and Passmore, A. P. and Lapane, K. L.},
  title   = {{Withholding, discontinuing and withdrawing medications in dementia patients at the end of life: a neglected problem in the disadvantaged dying?}},
  journal = {Drugs \& aging},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.2165/11536760-000000000-00000},
  pmid    = {20524704},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2165/11536760-000000000-00000}
}

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: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
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

Significant research must be undertaken in the area of medication discontinuation in patients with advanced dementia nearing the end of life to determine how physicians currently decide whether medications should be discontinued, and also to develop the evidence base and provide guidance on systematic medication discontinuation.

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 36/100

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. 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Drugs & aging)
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	1 / 5	2010 — within 20 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	— / 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
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20524704)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	21 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100.
Total	36 / 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.

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

Related studies in End-of-life care 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 End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →