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 43 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Confusion and agitation in elderly patients are crucial problems. This study tested Gerdner's mid-range theory of individualized music intervention for agitation. An experimental repeated measures pretest-posttest crossover design compared the immediate and residual effects of individualized music to classical "relaxation" music relative to baseline on the frequency of agitated behaviors in elderly persons with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders (ADRD). Thirty-nine subjects were recruited from six long-term-care facilities in Iowa. The sample consisted of 30 women and 9 men (mean age 82 years) with severe cognitive impairment. Baseline data were collected for 3 weeks. Findings from the Modified Hartsock Music Preference Questionnaire guided the selection of individualized music. Group A (n = 16) received individualized music for 6 weeks followed by a 2-week "washout" period and 6 weeks of classical "relaxation" music. Group B (n = 23) received the same protocol but in reverse order. Music interventions were presented for 30 minutes, two times per week. The Modified Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory measured the dependent variable. A repeated measures analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc test showed a significant reduction in agitation during and following individualized music compared to classical music. This study expands science by testing and supporting a theoretically based intervention for agitation in persons with ADRD.

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

APA 7th

Gerdner, L. A. (2000). Effects of individualized versus classical "relaxation" music on the frequency of agitation in elderly persons with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. International psychogeriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610200006190

Vancouver

Gerdner LA. Effects of individualized versus classical "relaxation" music on the frequency of agitation in elderly persons with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. International psychogeriatrics. 2000. doi:10.1017/s1041610200006190. PMID: 10798453.

BibTeX

@article{gerdner2000-10798453,
  author  = {Gerdner, L. A.},
  title   = {{Effects of individualized versus classical "relaxation" music on the frequency of agitation in elderly persons with Alzheimer's disease and related disorders}},
  journal = {International psychogeriatrics},
  year    = {2000},
  doi     = {10.1017/s1041610200006190},
  pmid    = {10798453},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610200006190}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 43/100
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 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 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 0 of 2. 25 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Total 43 of 100.25 of the 58 points we could judge = 43 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International psychogeriatrics)
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 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2000 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 1 / 4 16 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 10798453)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 25 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 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.

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

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →