SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · PPR

Widening the scope of social science research on the dementias: the importance of Lewy Body Dementia

· 2025-07-25

DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.24604.1

Check source for accessPreprintOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Lewy Body Dementia (LBD) is an umbrella diagnostic label which includes both Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB) and Parkinson’s Disease Dementia (PDD). Research on LBD has overwhelmingly adopted a biomedical, clinical perspective, while the field of dementia studies has often orientated towards singular, monolithic understandings of dementia. Accordingly, diagnostic categories, sociotechnical constitution, or lived experience of dementia subtypes of have not been adequately disaggregated and conceptualised. The heterogeneity of LBD’s aetiology, presentation, and management - located across historically constituted medical specialities underscore the need to build, critique, and extend conventional social sciences approaches to neurodegenerative illness and health, with the aim of ultimately improving health and care. Here we review existing social science literature regarding LBD, and propose an agenda for interdisciplinary research on the condition. First, we map the social arena of research on LBD and its relationship with existing Dementia and Parkinson’s Disease research. Second, we examine the clinical and service barriers and facilitators to diagnosis and management of LBD. Third, we analyse the role lived experience might play in informing social science research on LBD. We conclude by highlighting 10 key priorities around which a social scientific, and in particular a sociologically-informed, approach to LBD might coalesce.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.