Cited by 243Grief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Grief reactions in dementia carers: a systematic review

Chan, Diana, Livingston, Gill, Jones, Louise, Sampson, Elizabeth L·2013·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Supporting dementia carers is an identified target of the UK government, yet we know little about such family carers' grief before and after the death of the person with dementia for whom they care. We systematically review the existing literature on characteristics, prevalence, predictors and associations of grief in dementia carers before and after death. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and found 31 publications meeting predetermined criteria. RESULTS: Grief in dementia carers, which may be normal or complicated, is a complex reaction to losses occurring before and after death. Carers experience anticipatory grief as multiple losses for themselves (companionship, personal freedom and control) and the person with dementia. Anticipation and ambiguity about the future, anger, frustration and guilt are core features. Anticipatory grief is greatest in moderate to severe stage dementia and spouse carers, especially when the person with dementia is institutionalised. There was poor quality evidence about the prevalence of grief; studies reported anticipatory grief between 47% and 71%, and complicated grief after death is estimated around 20%. Carer depression increases with anticipatory grief. Being a spouse carer and being depressed are the strongest predictors of complicated and normal grief after death. CONCLUSION: Grief in dementia carers can be expected; however, those at risk of distressing anticipatory and complicated grief may be identified and targeted for intervention when necessary. Higher quality research from a wider range of samples and countries is needed to explore this complex and emergent topic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.3795

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 48 · Cited by 243

Authors
Chan, D., Livingston, G., Jones, L., & Sampson, E. L.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • Department of Mental Health Sciences Archway campus, Highgate Hill London N19 5NL UK
Corresponding author
Chan, Diana
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-03-08
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
1-17
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W1877898383
Cited by
243
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Marie Curie (MCCC-FCO-11-U)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
grief, dementia caregivers, anticipatory grief, complicated grief, family caregivers, institutionalization, loss
MeSH terms
Adjustment Disorders, Attitude to Death, Death, Dementia, United Kingdom, Grief, Humans, Caregivers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review