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 50 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Firearms are common in the households of persons with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD). Safety in Dementia (SiD) is a free web-based decision aid that was developed to support ADRD caregivers in addressing firearm access. Objective We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of SiD among a web-based sample of ADRD caregivers. Methods SiD was tested in 2 phases by using participants who were recruited from a web-based convenience sample (Amazon Mechanical Turk participants). In phase 1, caregivers were randomized to view either the intervention (SiD) or the control (Alzheimer's Association materials), and the blinding of participants to the study arms was conducted. In phase 2, caregivers of individuals with ADRD and firearm access were recruited; all of these participants viewed the firearm section of SiD. In both phases, participants viewed SiD independently for as long as they wanted. Measures for evaluating decision-making and SiD acceptability were used, and these were assessed via a self-administered web-based questionnaire. Results Participants were recruited for phases 1 (n=203) and 2 (n=54). Although it was feasible to collect the study outcome data in a web-based format, in phase 1, there were no significant differences between SiD and the control in terms of decision-making and self-efficacy. The majority (137/203, 67.5%) of phase 1 participants spent between 5 and 10 minutes reviewing the resources. In phase 2, 61% (33/54) of participants spent 5 to 10 minutes viewing the firearm section, and 31% (17/54) spent 10 to 20 minutes viewing this section. Usability and acceptability were high across the phases. Conclusions SiD represents a new resource for promoting safety among people with dementia, and high acceptability was achieved in a pilot trial. In this sample, SiD performed similarly to Alzheimer's Association materials in supporting decision-making and self-efficacy.

Key findings

Why it matters

This pilot trial of a web-based decision aid about firearm access found no significant differences from control in decision-making and self-efficacy. It concerns caregiver decision support, not treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 50/100
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 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited 2 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 1 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. Total 50 of 100.50 of 100 points earned50 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JMIR formative research)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 JMIR Formative Research: journal h-index 54 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 Design recorded as “clinical trial”, which our rubric does not rank (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 3 / 5 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 203 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 2 / 7 Cited 9 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 1.3 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 1.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 1 / 6 Cited by 2 other studies in this library
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 6 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Daniel D. Matlock: h-index 53 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Veterans Health Administration: institution h-index 968 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34550082)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Total 50 / 100 —

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Betz, M. E., Polzer, E., Nearing, K., Knoepke, C. E., Johnson, R. L., Meador, L., et al. (2021). Feasibility and Acceptability of a Web-Based Caregiver Decision Aid (Safety in Dementia) for Firearm Access: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR formative research. https://doi.org/10.2196/30990

Vancouver

Betz ME, Polzer E, Nearing K, Knoepke CE, Johnson RL, Meador L, et al. Feasibility and Acceptability of a Web-Based Caregiver Decision Aid (Safety in Dementia) for Firearm Access: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR formative research. 2021. doi:10.2196/30990. PMID: 34550082.

BibTeX

@article{betz2021-34550082,
  author  = {Betz, M. E. and Polzer, E. and Nearing, K. and Knoepke, C. E. and Johnson, R. L. and Meador, L. and Matlock, D. D.},
  title   = {{Feasibility and Acceptability of a Web-Based Caregiver Decision Aid (Safety in Dementia) for Firearm Access: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial}},
  journal = {JMIR formative research},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.2196/30990},
  pmid    = {34550082},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2196/30990}
}

Studies this one cites

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

Later studies that cite this one

2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Treatments

Also tagged “care”

996 studies in the library carry the topic tag “care”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 996 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →