Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Remind Me To Remember: A pilot study of a novel smartphone reminder application for older adults with dementia and mild cognitive impairment
Hackett K, Lehman S, Divers R, Ambrogi M, Gomes L, Tan CC, Giovannetti T.. Neuropsychological rehabilitation, 2020-07-20
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
The SmartPrompt is a smartphone-based reminder application informed by a neuropsychological model of functional disability. This laboratory-based pilot study examined the SmartPrompt feasibility, efficacy, and subjective usability using a within-participant, counterbalanced, cross-over design. Ten participants ( M age = 80.3 + 8.2; M education = 15.7 + 2.5; 60% female) with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia completed the Remember to Drink Test, which required preparing a glass of water at four predetermined times, in a SmartPrompt (SP) and Unprompted condition (UP). Written cues and a clock were available in both conditions; however, in the SP, the smartphone presented auditory alarms and visual reminders to obtain the water at specified times and required photo logging. In a separate session, caregivers were trained and tested on configuring the SmartPrompt. Overall, caregivers and participants learned to effectively use the SmartPrompt. Caregivers achieved near-perfect scores on the configuration quiz and responded well to training. Participants completed significantly more Remember to Drink tasks in the SP (93%) than UP (56%); checking the cues/clock decreased by 87% in the SP. Usability ratings were excellent among caregivers and fair among participants. Results indicate that the SmartPrompt holds promise for reducing functional disability in older adults with cognitive difficulties in at-home contexts.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hackett, K., Lehman, S., Divers, R., Ambrogi, M., Gomes, L., Tan, C. C., et al. (2022). Remind Me To Remember: A pilot study of a novel smartphone reminder application for older adults with dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Neuropsychological rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2020.1794909
Vancouver
Hackett K, Lehman S, Divers R, Ambrogi M, Gomes L, Tan CC, et al. Remind Me To Remember: A pilot study of a novel smartphone reminder application for older adults with dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Neuropsychological rehabilitation. 2022. doi:10.1080/09602011.2020.1794909. PMID: 32684106.
BibTeX
@article{hackett2022-32684106,
author = {Hackett, K. and Lehman, S. and Divers, R. and Ambrogi, M. and Gomes, L. and Tan, C. C. and Giovannetti, T.},
title = {{Remind Me To Remember: A pilot study of a novel smartphone reminder application for older adults with dementia and mild cognitive impairment}},
journal = {Neuropsychological rehabilitation},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1080/09602011.2020.1794909},
pmid = {32684106},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2020.1794909}
}
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.
Key findings
- Overall, caregivers and participants learned to effectively use the SmartPrompt.
- Participants completed significantly more Remember to Drink tasks in the SP (93%) than UP (56%); checking the cues/clock decreased by 87% in the SP.
- Results indicate that the SmartPrompt holds promise for reducing functional disability in older adults with cognitive difficulties in at-home contexts.
Study details
- Effect sizedecreased by 87%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 69/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size 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 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neuropsychological rehabilitation) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”) |
| 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 | 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| 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 32684106) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 40 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100. |
| Total | 69 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.