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 52 out of 100. Cognitive tests and assessment

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

INTRODUCTION: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is an important intervenable stage for the prevention of dementia. Hypertension is associated with impaired cognition, and when combined with MCI, it may lead to a poor prognosis. Digital computerised cognitive training (CCT) has recently become a potential instrument for improving cognition, but evidence for its efficacy remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a digital adaptive CCT intervention in older patients with hypertension and MCI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The multicentre, double-blinded, randomised, actively -controlled clinical trial will recruit 200 older (≥60 years) patients with hypertension and MCI from 11 hospitals across China. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the intervention group (multidomain adaptative CCT) and active control group (non-adaptive cognitive training) for 12-week cognitive training for 30 min/day and 5 days/week. Those who have completed their 12-week training in the intervention group will be rerandomised into the continuation and discontinuation training groups. All participants will be followed up to 24 weeks. Neuropsychological assessments and structural and functional 7.0 T MRI will be obtained at baseline and at 12-week and 24-week follow-up. The primary outcome is the possible improvement of global cognitive function at 12 weeks, as measured by the Basic Cognitive Aptitude Tests. Secondary and exploratory endpoints include the major cognitive domain function improvement, self-efficacy, mental health, quality of life and MRI measurements of the brain. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the institutional review board of Beijing Anzhen Hospital and thereafter by all other participating centres. Trial findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05704270.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 52/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 29 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 52 of 100. Total 52 of 100.29 of the 56 points we could judge = 52 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 29 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMJ open)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 4 / 5 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 38423771)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 29 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100.
Total 52 / 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.

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

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.

APA 7th

Kong, Y., Guo, Q. H., Zhou, L., He, L., Zeng, Y., Du, X., et al. (2024). Digital computerised cognitive training for preventing cognitive decline among hypertensive patients: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (DELIGHT trial). BMJ open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079305

Vancouver

Kong Y, Guo QH, Zhou L, He L, Zeng Y, Du X, et al. Digital computerised cognitive training for preventing cognitive decline among hypertensive patients: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (DELIGHT trial). BMJ open. 2024. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079305. PMID: 38423771.

BibTeX

@article{kong2024-38423771,
  author  = {Kong, Yu and Guo, Qian Hui and Zhou, Le and He, Liu and Zeng, Yong and Du, Xin and Dong, Jian Zeng and Jiang, Chao and others},
  title   = {{Digital computerised cognitive training for preventing cognitive decline among hypertensive patients: a study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (DELIGHT trial)}},
  journal = {BMJ open},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079305},
  pmid    = {38423771},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079305}
}

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.

Similar studies

More on Cognitive tests and assessment

See all studies in Cognitive tests and assessment →