Home › Research › Prevention trials
A randomized trial to measure the impact of a community-based cognitive training intervention on balance and gait in cognitively intact Black older adults
Smith-Ray RL, Makowski-Woidan B, Hughes SL.. Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 2014-10-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Fall prevention is important for maintaining mobility and independence into old age. Approaches for reducing falls include exercise, tai chi, and home modifications; however, causes of falling are multifactorial and include not just physical but cognitive factors. Cognitive decline occurs with age, but older adults with the greatest declines in executive function experience more falls. The purpose of this study was twofold: to demonstrate the feasibility of a community-based cognitive training program for cognitively intact Black older adults and to analyze its impact on gait and balance in this population. Method This pilot study used a pretest/posttest randomized trial design with assignment to an intervention or control group. Participants assigned to the intervention completed a computer-based cognitive training class that met 2 days a week for 60 min over 10 weeks. Classes were held at senior/community centers. Primary outcomes included balance as measured by the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), 10-meter gait speed, and 10-meter gait speed under visuospatial dual-task condition. All measures were assessed at baseline and immediately post-intervention. Results Participants were community-dwelling Black adults with a mean age of 72.5 and history of falls (N = 45). Compared to controls, intervention participants experienced statistically significant improvements in BBS and gait speed. Mean performance on distracted gait speed also improved more for intervention participants compared to controls. Conclusion Findings from this pilot randomized trial demonstrate the feasibility of a community-based cognitive training intervention. They provide initial evidence that cognitive training may be an efficacious approach toward improving balance and gait in older adults known to have a history of falls.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Smith-Ray, R. L., Makowski-Woidan, B., & Hughes, S. L. (2014). A randomized trial to measure the impact of a community-based cognitive training intervention on balance and gait in cognitively intact Black older adults. Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198114537068
Vancouver
Smith-Ray RL, Makowski-Woidan B, Hughes SL. A randomized trial to measure the impact of a community-based cognitive training intervention on balance and gait in cognitively intact Black older adults. Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education. 2014. doi:10.1177/1090198114537068. PMID: 25274713.
BibTeX
@article{smithray2014-25274713,
author = {Smith-Ray, R. L. and Makowski-Woidan, B. and Hughes, S. L.},
title = {{A randomized trial to measure the impact of a community-based cognitive training intervention on balance and gait in cognitively intact Black older adults}},
journal = {Health education \& behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1177/1090198114537068},
pmid = {25274713},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198114537068}
}
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.
Key findings
- Results Participants were community-dwelling Black adults with a mean age of 72.5 and history of falls (N = 45).
- Compared to controls, intervention participants experienced statistically significant improvements in BBS and gait speed.
- Mean performance on distracted gait speed also improved more for intervention participants compared to controls.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Participants45
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 71/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 71 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 45 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomised (as stated in the record) |
| 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 |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25274713) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 41 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 71 out of 100. |
| Total | 71 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “controlled”
1,116 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,116 tagged studies.