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 26 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

There was a significant correlation in MoCA and FLCI-2 measures but no significant correlation between the language measures (CIUs, FLCI-2, or word count). Additionally, as preservation of language skills is imperative, 82% of participants either improved or maintained (within 5 points) FLCI-2 scores and CIU counts (within five CIUs) during intervention. Results from this study suggest that RT could influence the maintenance of language skills in PWD, therefore preserving overall quality of life.

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

APA 7th

Busch, C. M., Gilbertson, L. R., & Feggestad, K. (2025). Evaluation of Reminiscence Therapy on Language Outcomes Among People With Dementia. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_persp-25-00022

Vancouver

Busch CM, Gilbertson LR, Feggestad K. Evaluation of Reminiscence Therapy on Language Outcomes Among People With Dementia. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups. 2025. doi:10.1044/2025_persp-25-00022.

BibTeX

@article{busch2025-a51667e4,
  author  = {Busch, Cody Marie and Gilbertson, Lynn R. and Feggestad, Kaia},
  title   = {{Evaluation of Reminiscence Therapy on Language Outcomes Among People With Dementia}},
  journal = {Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1044/2025_persp-25-00022},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_persp-25-00022}
}

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

Why it matters

This study found that 82% of participants either improved or maintained language scores during reminiscence therapy, suggesting it could help maintain language skills. There was no significant correlation between the language measures, and the study does not show that reminiscence therapy treats or prevents Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 26/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 1 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 0 of 3; Multicenter collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 25 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 26 of 100. Total 26 of 100.25 of the 96 points we could judge = 26 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 25 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 26 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups: journal h-index 34 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 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 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 1 / 6 Cited 0.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 1 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Kaia Feggestad holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record 0 / 3 University of Wisconsin–Whitewater: institution h-index 163 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 25 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 26 out of 100.
Total 26 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it.

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

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →