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 84 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Aims Joint prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and dementia could reduce the burden of both conditions. The Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) demonstrated a beneficial effect on cognition (primary outcome) and we assessed the effect of this lifestyle intervention on incident CVD (pre-specified secondary outcome). Methods and results FINGER enrolled 1259 individuals aged 60-77 years (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01041989). They were randomized (1:1) to a 2-year multi-domain intervention with diet, physical and cognitive activity, and vascular monitoring (n = 631), or general health advice (n = 628). National registries provided data on CVD including stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or coronary heart event. During an average of 7.4 years, 229 participants (18%) had at least one CVD diagnosis: 107 in the intervention group and 122 in the control group. The incidence of cerebrovascular events was lower in the intervention than the control group: hazard ratio (HR) for combined stroke/TIA was 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.99] after adjusting for background characteristics. Hazard ratio for coronary events was 0.84 (CI: 0.56-1.26) and total CVD events 0.80 (95% CI: 0.61-1.04). Among those with history of CVD (n = 145), the incidence of both total CVD events (HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.90) and stroke/TIA (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.20-0.81) was lower in the intervention than the control group. Conclusion A 2-year multi-domain lifestyle intervention among older adults was effective in preventing cerebrovascular events and also total CVD events among those who had history of CVD.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 84/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 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 2 of 2. 49 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 84 of 100. Total 84 of 100.49 of the 58 points we could judge = 84 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed 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, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 49 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 84 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European heart journal)
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 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 631 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)
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 35051281)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 49 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 49 of the 58 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.

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

Lehtisalo, J., Rusanen, M., Solomon, A., Antikainen, R., Laatikainen, T., Peltonen, M., et al. (2022). Effect of a multi-domain lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk in older people: the FINGER trial. European heart journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab922

Vancouver

Lehtisalo J, Rusanen M, Solomon A, Antikainen R, Laatikainen T, Peltonen M, et al. Effect of a multi-domain lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk in older people: the FINGER trial. European heart journal. 2022. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab922. PMID: 35051281.

BibTeX

@article{lehtisalo2022-35051281,
  author  = {Lehtisalo, J. and Rusanen, M. and Solomon, A. and Antikainen, R. and Laatikainen, T. and Peltonen, M. and Strandberg, T. and Tuomilehto, J. and others},
  title   = {{Effect of a multi-domain lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk in older people: the FINGER trial}},
  journal = {European heart journal},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1093/eurheartj/ehab922},
  pmid    = {35051281},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehab922}
}

Related studies in Prevention trials

Also tagged “delirium”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “delirium”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →