Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality of life in dementia: a systematically conducted narrative review of dementia-specific measurement scales

Bowling, Ann, Rowe, Gene, Adams, Sue, Sands, Paula, Samsi, Kritika, Crane, Maureen, Joly, Louise, Manthorpe, Jill·2015·Aging & Mental Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Ascertaining the quality of life (QoL) in people with dementia is important for evaluating service outcomes and cost-effectiveness. This paper identifies QoL measures for people with dementia and assesses their properties. METHOD: A systematic narrative review identified articles using dementia QoL measures. Electronic databases searched were AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Index to Theses, IBSS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science. All available years and languages (if with an English language abstract) were included. RESULTS: Searches yielded 6806 citations; 3043 were multiple duplicates (759 being true duplicates). Abstracts were read; 182 full papers were selected/obtained, of which 126 were included as relevant. Few measures were based on rigorous conceptual frameworks. Some referenced Lawton's model (Dementia Quality of Life [DQOL] and Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease [QOL-AD]), though these tapped part of this only; others claimed relationship to a health-related QoL concept (e.g. DEMQOL), though had less social relevance; others were based on limited domains (e.g. activity, affect) or clinical opinions (Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia [QUALID]). Many measures were based on proxy assessments or observations of people with dementia's QoL, rather than their own ratings. The Bath Assessment of Subjective Quality of Life in Dementia (BASQID) was developed involving people with dementia and caregivers, but excluded some of their main themes. All measures were tested on selective samples only (ranging from community to hospital clinics, or subsamples/waves of existing population surveys), in a few sites. Their general applicability remains unknown, and predictive validity remains largely untested. CONCLUSION: The lack of consensus on measuring QoL in dementia suggests a need for a broader, more rigorously tested QoL measure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13607863.2014.915923

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
Bowling, A., Rowe, G., Adams, S., Sands, P., Samsi, K., Crane, M., Joly, L., & Manthorpe, J.
Venue
Aging & Mental Health
Published
2014-06-02
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
13-31
ISSN
  • 1360-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1364-6915
OpenAlex
W2094824056
Cited by
217
References
1
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality of life in dementia: a systematically conducted narrative review of dementia-specific measurement scales. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13607863.2014.915923
The paper
Bowling, A., Rowe, G., Adams, S., Sands, P., Samsi, K., Crane, M., Joly, L., & Manthorpe, J. (2015). Quality of life in dementia: a systematically conducted narrative review of dementia-specific measurement scales. Aging & Mental Health. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2014.915923

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.