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.

54/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background The need for dementia training for retail workers has been recognized by dementia-friendly initiatives. However, evidence for dementia training in non-healthcare workplaces is lacking, and dissemination is challenging due to constraints on private companies' time and finances. The online training program ReDeSign (Relational Design for Dementia and Job Significance) applies mobile micro-learning methods and Relational Design Theory against time and financial constraints, respectively, and is designed to improve work-related outcomes. Methods This study will evaluate the effectiveness of ReDeSign with a randomized controlled trial. One hundred and twenty-four convenience store workers in Tokyo will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or control groups. ReDeSign consists of four contents relevant to the job: simulation games, lectures and quizzes, virtual contacts, and information about benefits to others. Self-reported surveys will be conducted for individual workers at baseline, one month later, and three months later. ReDeSign will be delivered to workers in the intervention ( n = 62) and control ( n = 62) groups immediately after the baseline survey and after the one-month survey, respectively. The primary outcome is the change of attitude toward people with dementia, and the secondary outcomes are dementia knowledge, helping behavior, job satisfaction, workers’ intention to stay, and persistence. Discussion ReDeSign provides dementia training to convenience store workers and contributes to developing an inclusive community for people with dementia. The results of this study may provide a new strategy for the dissemination of dementia training in non-healthcare workplaces.

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

APA 7th

Matsumoto, H., Igarashi, A., Hagiwara, Y., & Yamamoto‐Mitani, N. (2022). Relational Design for Dementia and Job Significance (ReDeSign): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of an online dementia training for retail workers. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100896

Vancouver

Matsumoto H, Igarashi A, Hagiwara Y, Yamamoto‐Mitani N. Relational Design for Dementia and Job Significance (ReDeSign): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of an online dementia training for retail workers. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100896. PMID: 35112011.

BibTeX

@article{matsumoto2022-35112011,
  author  = {Matsumoto, Hiroshige and Igarashi, Ayumi and Hagiwara, Yasuhiro and Yamamoto‐Mitani, Noriko},
  title   = {{Relational Design for Dementia and Job Significance (ReDeSign): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of an online dementia training for retail workers}},
  journal = {Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100896},
  pmid    = {35112011},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100896}
}

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

The results of this study may provide a new strategy for the dissemination of dementia training in non-healthcare workplaces.

Why it matters

This is a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of an online dementia training for 124 convenience store workers in Tokyo, with attitude toward people with dementia as the primary outcome. No results are reported yet, so it cannot show whether the training changes attitudes or behavior.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

Study designrandomized controlled trial
Participants62
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 54/100

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.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications)
Journal's citation record	0 / 4	Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications: journal h-index 41 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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	2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	62 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	2 / 7	Cited 6 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	1 / 5	1.0 citations a year over 6 year(s) since 2022
Impact for its field and year	1 / 6	Cited 0.7× 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 5 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Noriko Yamamoto‐Mitani: h-index 26 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	The University of Tokyo: institution h-index 1,463 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	0 / 3	OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35112011)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	54 / 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).

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 Risk factors

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,224 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 1,224 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →