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 78 out of 100. Cognitive tests and assessment

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background For the rising number of people living with dementia, cost-effective community-based interventions to support psychosocial care are needed. The FindMyApps intervention has been developed with and for people with dementia and their caregivers, to help them use tablets to facilitate self-management and engagement in meaningful social activities. A feasibility study and exploratory pilot trial evaluating FindMyApps have been carried out. This definitive trial further evaluates the effectiveness of the intervention and, for the first time, the cost-effectiveness. Methods A randomized controlled non-blinded single-center two-arm superiority trial will be conducted. Community-dwelling people with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), or dementia with a Mini Mental-State Examination (MMSE) of > 17 and < 26, or Global Deterioration Scale 3 or 4, with an informal caregiver and access to a wireless internet connection will be included. In total, 150 patient-caregiver dyads will be randomly allocated to receive either usual care (control arm - tablet computer; n = 75 dyads) or usual care and the FindMyApps intervention (experimental arm - tablet computer and FindMyApps; n = 75 dyads). The primary outcomes are: for people with dementia, self-management and social participation; for caregivers, sense of competence. In addition to a main effect analysis, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. In line with MRC guidance for evaluation of complex interventions a process evaluation will also be undertaken. Discussion Results of the trial are expected to be available in 2023 and will be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed scientific journals, in addition to conference presentations and reporting via the EU Marie Sklodowska-Curie DISTINCT ITN network. By providing evidence for or against the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the FindMyApps intervention, the results of the trial will influence national implementation of FindMyApps. We hope that the results of the trial will further stimulate research and development at the intersection of technology and psycho-social care in dementia. We hope to further demonstrate that the randomized controlled trial is a valuable and feasible means of evaluating new digital technologies, to stimulate further high-quality research in this growing field. Trial registration number Netherlands Trial Register: NL8157 ; registered 15th November 2019.

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

APA 7th

Neal, D. P., Kerkhof, Y. J. F., Ettema, T. P., Muller, M., Bosmans, J., Finnema, E., et al. (2021). Evaluation of FindMyApps: protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tablet-based intervention to improve self-management and social participation of community-dwelling people with mild dementia, compared to usual tablet use. BMC geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02038-8

Vancouver

Neal DP, Kerkhof YJF, Ettema TP, Muller M, Bosmans J, Finnema E, et al. Evaluation of FindMyApps: protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tablet-based intervention to improve self-management and social participation of community-dwelling people with mild dementia, compared to usual tablet use. BMC geriatrics. 2021. doi:10.1186/s12877-021-02038-8. PMID: 33627069.

BibTeX

@article{neal2021-33627069,
  author  = {Neal, D. P. and Kerkhof, Y. J. F. and Ettema, T. P. and Muller, M. and Bosmans, J. and Finnema, E. and Graff, M. and Dijkstra, K. and others},
  title   = {{Evaluation of FindMyApps: protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tablet-based intervention to improve self-management and social participation of community-dwelling people with mild dementia, compared to usual tablet use}},
  journal = {BMC geriatrics},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1186/s12877-021-02038-8},
  pmid    = {33627069},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02038-8}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 78/100
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 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 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. 45 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 78 of 100. Total 78 of 100.45 of the 58 points we could judge = 78 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported 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 45 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 78 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC geriatrics)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised 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 1 / 4 75 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 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 33627069)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 45 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 58 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 Cognitive tests and assessment

Similar studies

More on Cognitive tests and assessment

See all studies in Cognitive tests and assessment →