ArticlePloS one2026
Place of death for people with dementia: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDementia is a global health concern that contributes significantly to severe health-related suffering and poses high demands on healthcare systems, patients, families, and caregivers. Caring for people with dementia should include all the stages of illness, including end-of-life care.
aimGiven that the place of death is a crucial aspect of end-of-life care, we aimed to analyze the scientific literature on the place of death of individuals with dementia, the sociodemographic and contextual variables associated with it, and evidence-based suggestions to improve end-of-life care for people with dementia.
methodsWe conducted a scoping review in 19 databases in November 2023 and updated the search in February 2025, yielding 1590 and 660 sources of evidence, respectively. Manuscripts had to a) focus on the frequency of more than one place of death, b) include population with dementia, c) use administrative data, and d) be published in peer-reviewed primary sources to be included in this study. The procedure for searching the sources of evidence and data charting was based on the structured approach for conducting scoping reviews by Arksey and O'Malley. Pre-registration can be retrieved at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BVXMY.
resultsAfter screening, a total of 48 studies were included in this review. Results indicate a great variability in the place of death of people with dementia across different regions and settings. Overall, in Europe and North America, it was more common for people with dementia to die in long-term care facilities like care homes, nursing homes, and sheltered housing; in East Asia and the Pacific, medical facilities (i.e., hospitals, mental health facilities, and private clinics) were more common. Studies that showed trends also indicate an increase in long-term-care facilities and a decrease in medical facilities and homes as the place of death. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries, raising questions about the diverse factors that may influence the place of death, such as access to services and socioeconomic status. DISCUSSION: These results could inform decisions on allocating resources and training for end-of-life care for people with dementia. However, more research is needed to increase the representativeness of other world regions and understand other variables that influence the place of death.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.