Home › Research › Prevention trials
Effect of a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention on Estimated Dementia Risk
Alina Solomon, Ron Handels, Anders Wimo, Riitta Antikainen, Tiina Laatikainen, Esko Levälahti, Markku Peltonen, Hilkka Soininen et al.. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2021
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
We investigated the effect of a multidomain lifestyle intervention on the risk of dementia estimated using the validated CAIDE risk score (post-hoc analysis). The Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) is a 2-year randomized controlled trial among 1,260 at-risk older adults (60-77 years). Difference in the estimated mean change in CAIDE score at 2 years in the intervention compared to the control group was -0.16 (95 %CI -0.31 to 0.00) (p = 0.013), corresponding to a relative dementia risk reduction between 6.04-6.50%. This could be interpreted as a reflection of the prevention potential of the intervention.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Solomon, A., Handels, R., Wimo, A., Antikainen, R., Laatikainen, T., Levälahti, E., et al. (2021). Effect of a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention on Estimated Dementia Risk. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-210331
Vancouver
Solomon A, Handels R, Wimo A, Antikainen R, Laatikainen T, Levälahti E, et al. Effect of a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention on Estimated Dementia Risk. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2021. doi:10.3233/jad-210331. PMID: 34151805.
BibTeX
@article{solomon2021-34151805,
author = {Solomon, Alina and Handels, Ron and Wimo, Anders and Antikainen, Riitta and Laatikainen, Tiina and Levälahti, Esko and Peltonen, Markku and Soininen, Hilkka and others},
title = {{Effect of a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention on Estimated Dementia Risk}},
journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.3233/jad-210331},
pmid = {34151805},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-210331}
}
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
- Difference in the estimated mean change in CAIDE score at 2 years in the intervention compared to the control group was -0.16 (95 %CI -0.31 to 0.00) (p = 0.013), corresponding to a relative dementia risk reduction between 6.04-6.50%.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Effect size6.50%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 78/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomized controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size 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 free to read, so those were left out: it earned 46 of the 59 points we could judge it on, which is 78 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A 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 | 2021 — within 6 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomized / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomized (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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34151805) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 46 / 59 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 46 of the 59 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
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 “metabolic-syndrome”
304 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 304 tagged studies.