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 48 out of 100. Cognitive tests and assessment

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

More than 50 million people worldwide live with a dementia, and most are cared for by family members. Family caregivers often experience chronic stress and insomnia, resulting in decreased mental and physical health. Accessibility of in-person stress reduction therapy is limited due to caregiver time constraints and distance from therapy sites. Mentalizing imagery therapy (MIT) provides mindfulness and guided imagery tools to reduce stress, promote self and other understanding, and increase feelings of interconnectedness. Combining MIT with caregiver skills training might enable caregivers to both reduce stress and better utilize newly learned caregiving skills, but this has never been studied. Delivering MIT through a smartphone application (App) has the potential to overcome difficulties with scalability and dissemination and offers caregivers an easy-to-use format. Harnessing passive smartphone data provides an important opportunity to study behavioral changes continuously and with higher granularity than routine clinical assessments. This protocol describes a randomized, controlled, superiority trial in which 120 family dementia caregivers, aged 60 years or older, will be assigned to smartphone App delivery of caregiver skills with MIT (experimental condition) or without MIT (control condition). The primary objectives of the trial are to assess whether the experimental condition is superior to control on reducing family caregiver stress, insomnia and related outcomes and to demonstrate the feasibility of developing behavioral markers from passive smartphone data that predict health outcomes in older adults. Trial outcomes may inform the suitability of our intervention for caregivers and provide new methods for assessment of older adults.

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

APA 7th

Jain, F. A., Okereke, O., Gitlin, L., Pedrelli, P., Onnela, J. P., Nyer, M., et al. (2022). Mentalizing imagery therapy to augment skills training for dementia caregivers: Protocol for a randomized, controlled trial of a mobile application and digital phenotyping. Contemporary clinical trials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2022.106737

Vancouver

Jain FA, Okereke O, Gitlin L, Pedrelli P, Onnela JP, Nyer M, et al. Mentalizing imagery therapy to augment skills training for dementia caregivers: Protocol for a randomized, controlled trial of a mobile application and digital phenotyping. Contemporary clinical trials. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2022.106737. PMID: 35331943.

BibTeX

@article{jain2022-35331943,
  author  = {Jain, F. A. and Okereke, O. and Gitlin, L. and Pedrelli, P. and Onnela, J. P. and Nyer, M. and Ramirez Gomez, L. A. and Pittman, M. and others},
  title   = {{Mentalizing imagery therapy to augment skills training for dementia caregivers: Protocol for a randomized, controlled trial of a mobile application and digital phenotyping}},
  journal = {Contemporary clinical trials},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.cct.2022.106737},
  pmid    = {35331943},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2022.106737}
}

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 48/100
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 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 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 0 of 2. 28 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.28 of the 58 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Contemporary clinical trials)
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 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 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)
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 35331943)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 28 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 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

Also tagged “digital-phenotyping”

3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “digital-phenotyping”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Cognitive tests and assessment

See all studies in Cognitive tests and assessment →