Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Comparative Effectiveness of Behavioral Interventions on Quality of Life for Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Chandler MJ, Locke DE, Crook JE, Fields JA, Ball CT, Phatak VS, Dean PM, Morris M et al.. JAMA network open, 2019-05-03
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Importance Recommendations to engage in behavioral strategies to combat clinically significant cognitive and behavioral symptoms are routinely given to persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Results A total of 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75 [8] years; 160 [58.8%] male and 112 [41.2%] female) were enrolled in this study, with 56 randomized to the no yoga group, 54 to no computerized cognitive training, 52 to no wellness, 53 to no support, and 57 to no memory support system. Conclusions and relevance These results provide further support for behavioral interventions for persons with MCI. These findings provide an initial exploration of the effect of behavioral interventions on patient-advocated outcomes in persons with MCI.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Chandler, M. J., Locke, D. E., Crook, J. E., Fields, J. A., Ball, C. T., Phatak, V. S., et al. (2019). Comparative Effectiveness of Behavioral Interventions on Quality of Life for Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA network open. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3016
Vancouver
Chandler MJ, Locke DE, Crook JE, Fields JA, Ball CT, Phatak VS, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Behavioral Interventions on Quality of Life for Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA network open. 2019. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3016. PMID: 31099860.
BibTeX
@article{chandler2019-31099860,
author = {Chandler, M. J. and Locke, D. E. and Crook, J. E. and Fields, J. A. and Ball, C. T. and Phatak, V. S. and Dean, P. M. and Morris, M. and others},
title = {{Comparative Effectiveness of Behavioral Interventions on Quality of Life for Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial}},
journal = {JAMA network open},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3016},
pmid = {31099860},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.3016}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Importance Recommendations to engage in behavioral strategies to combat clinically significant cognitive and behavioral symptoms are routinely given to persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
- Results A total of 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75 [8] years; 160 [58.8%] male and 112 [41.2%] female) were enrolled in this study, with 56 randomized to the no yoga group, 54 to no computerized cognitive training, 52 to no wellness, 53 to no support, and 57 to no memory support system.
- Conclusions and relevance These results provide further support for behavioral interventions for persons with MCI.
- These findings provide an initial exploration of the effect of behavioral interventions on patient-advocated outcomes in persons with MCI.
Study details
- Participants272
- Effect size58.8%; 41.2%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 84/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. 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 and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 51 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 84 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA network open) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 272 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31099860) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 51 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 51 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 84 out of 100. |
| Total | 84 / 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 Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.