Home › Research › Prevention trials
Efficacy of multidomain interventions to improve physical frailty, depression and cognition: data from cluster-randomized controlled trials
Chen LK, Hwang AC, Lee WJ, Peng LN, Lin MH, Neil DL, Shih SF, Loh CH et al.. Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2020-03-05
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Results Efficacy Study participants (n = 1082, 40 clusters) were 75.1 ± 6.3 years old, 68.7% women, and 64.7% prefrail/frail; analytic clusters: 19 intervention (410/549 completed) vs. 21 control (375/533 completed). The standard and enhanced multidomain interventions both reduced frailty and significantly improved aspects of physical, functional, and cognitive performance, especially among ≥75-year-olds.
Key findings
- Results Efficacy Study participants (n = 1082, 40 clusters) were 75.1 ± 6.3 years old, 68.7% women, and 64.7% prefrail/frail; analytic clusters: 19 intervention (410/549 completed) vs. 21 control (375/533 completed).
- The standard and enhanced multidomain interventions both reduced frailty and significantly improved aspects of physical, functional, and cognitive performance, especially among ≥75-year-olds.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Participants1,082
- Effect size68.7%; 64.7%; 83.6%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design 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 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 1,082 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 32134208) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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
Chen, L. K., Hwang, A. C., Lee, W. J., Peng, L. N., Lin, M. H., Neil, D. L., et al. (2020). Efficacy of multidomain interventions to improve physical frailty, depression and cognition: data from cluster-randomized controlled trials. Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12534
Vancouver
Chen LK, Hwang AC, Lee WJ, Peng LN, Lin MH, Neil DL, et al. Efficacy of multidomain interventions to improve physical frailty, depression and cognition: data from cluster-randomized controlled trials. Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle. 2020. doi:10.1002/jcsm.12534. PMID: 32134208.
BibTeX
@article{chen2020-32134208,
author = {Chen, L. K. and Hwang, A. C. and Lee, W. J. and Peng, L. N. and Lin, M. H. and Neil, D. L. and Shih, S. F. and Loh, C. H. and others},
title = {{Efficacy of multidomain interventions to improve physical frailty, depression and cognition: data from cluster-randomized controlled trials}},
journal = {Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle},
year = {2020},
doi = {10.1002/jcsm.12534},
pmid = {32134208},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12534}
}
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “cognitive-function”
1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.