Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objective To estimate the effect of a moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme on cognitive impairment and other outcomes in people with mild to moderate dementia. Design Multicentre, pragmatic, investigator masked, randomised controlled trial. Setting National Health Service primary care, community and memory services, dementia research registers, and voluntary sector providers in 15 English regions. Participants 494 people with dementia: 329 were assigned to an aerobic and strength exercise programme and 165 were assigned to usual care. Random allocation was 2:1 in favour of the exercise arm. Interventions Usual care plus four months of supervised exercise and support for ongoing physical activity, or usual care only. Interventions were delivered in community gym facilities and NHS premises. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was score on the Alzheimer's disease assessment scale-cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included activities of daily living, neuropsychiatric symptoms, health related quality of life, and carer quality of life and burden. Physical fitness (including the six minute walk test) was measured in the exercise arm during the intervention. Results The average age of participants was 77 (SD 7.9) years and 301/494 (61%) were men. By 12 months the mean ADAS-cog score had increased to 25.2 (SD 12.3) in the exercise arm and 23.8 (SD 10.4) in the usual care arm (adjusted between group difference -1.4, 95% confidence interval -2.6 to -0.2, P=0.03). This indicates greater cognitive impairment in the exercise group, although the average difference is small and clinical relevance uncertain. No differences were found in secondary outcomes or preplanned subgroup analyses by dementia type (Alzheimer's disease or other), severity of cognitive impairment, sex, and mobility. Compliance with exercise was good. Over 65% of participants (214/329) attended more than three quarters of scheduled sessions. Six minute walking distance improved over six weeks (mean change 18.1 m, 95% confidence interval 11.6 m to 24.6 m). Conclusion A moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme does not slow cognitive impairment in people with mild to moderate dementia. The exercise training programme improved physical fitness, but there were no noticeable improvements in other clinical outcomes. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10416500.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Null result

The record lists 494 participants. This large randomized trial tested a moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise programme in 494 people with mild to moderate dementia. Reported effect size: ADAS-cog adjusted difference -1.4 (95% CI -2.6 to -0.2) favouring usual care.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Lamb, S. E., Sheehan, B., Atherton, N., Nichols, V., Collins, H., Mistry, D., et al. (2018). Dementia And Physical Activity (DAPA) trial of moderate to high intensity exercise training for people with dementia: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1675

Vancouver

Lamb SE, Sheehan B, Atherton N, Nichols V, Collins H, Mistry D, et al. Dementia And Physical Activity (DAPA) trial of moderate to high intensity exercise training for people with dementia: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2018. doi:10.1136/bmj.k1675. PMID: 29769247.

BibTeX

@article{lamb2018-29769247,
  author  = {Lamb, S. E. and Sheehan, B. and Atherton, N. and Nichols, V. and Collins, H. and Mistry, D. and others},
  title   = {{Dementia And Physical Activity (DAPA) trial of moderate to high intensity exercise training for people with dementia: randomised controlled trial}},
  journal = {BMJ},
  year    = {2018},
  doi     = {10.1136/bmj.k1675},
  pmid    = {29769247},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1675}
}

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

Why it matters

This large randomized trial tested a moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise programme in 494 people with mild to moderate dementia. The study did not find that the exercise programme improved cognitive outcomes, so it does not support exercise training as a treatment to slow dementia in this group.

Study details

Limitations

Four-month intervention with ongoing activity support only; ADAS-cog difference small and of uncertain clinical relevance; cannot be masked to participants.

How this study scored 78/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 4 of 5; Impact for its field and year 5 of 6; Cited by studies here 3 of 6; Still being cited 3 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multicenter collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 76 of the 98 points it could be judged on, which is 78 of 100. Total 78 of 100.76 of the 98 points we could judge = 78 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. We have no data on free to read, so that was left out: it earned 76 of the 98 points we could judge it on, which is 78 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (BMJ)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 BMJ: journal h-index 413 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 11 / 12 A randomized controlled trial
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “null-result” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 494 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded 1 / 2 Randomized (as stated in the record)
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 415 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 4 / 5 41.5 citations a year over 10 year(s) since 2018
Impact for its field and year 5 / 6 Cited 32.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 3 / 6 Cited by 15 other studies in this library
Still being cited 3 / 4 Cited 113 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Ranjit Lall: h-index 44 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 University of Oxford: institution h-index 2,205 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 29769247)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 76 / 98 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 76 of the 98 points we could judge it on is 78 out of 100.
Total 78 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

15 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Treatments from nearby years

Also tagged “trial”

783 studies in the library carry the topic tag “trial”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 783 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →