Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Smarthealth technology study protocol to improve relationships between older adults with dementia and family caregivers
Rose KM, Coop Gordon K, Schlegel EC, Mccall M, Gao Y, Ma M, Lenger KA, Ko E et al.. Journal of advanced nursing, 2021-02-11
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Aim The aim of this study is to develop a Smarthealth system of monitoring, modelling, and interactive recommendation solutions (for caregivers) for in-home dementia patient care that focuses on caregiver-patient relationships. Design This descriptive study employs a single-group, non-randomized trial to examine functionality, effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of the novel Smarthealth system. Methods Thirty persons with Alzheimer's Disease or related dementia and their family caregivers (N = 30 dyads) will receive and install Smarthealth technology in their home. There will be a 1-month observation phase for collecting baseline mood states and a 2-month implementation phase when caregivers will receive stress management techniques for each detected, negative mood state. Caregivers will report technique implementation and usefulness, sent via Ecological Momentary Assessment system to the study-provided smartphone. Caregivers will provide daily, self-reported mood and health ratings. Instruments measuring caregiver assessment of disruptive behaviours and their effect on caregivers; caregiver depressive symptoms, anxiety and stress; caregiver strain; and family functioning will be completed at baseline and 3 months. The study received funding in 2018 and ethics board approval in 2019. Discussion This study will develop and test novel in-home technology to improve family caregiving relationships. Results from this study will help develop and improve the Smarthealth recommendation system and determine its usefulness, feasibility, and acceptability for persons with dementia and their family caregiver. Impact The Smarthealth technology discussed will provide in-home stress reduction resources at a time when older adults may be experiencing increasingly high rates of isolation and anxiety and caregiver dyads may be experiencing high levels of relationship strain. Trial registration This study was registered with Clinical Trials.gov (Identifier NCT04536701).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Rose, K. M., Coop Gordon, K., Schlegel, E. C., Mccall, M., Gao, Y., Ma, M., et al. (2021). Smarthealth technology study protocol to improve relationships between older adults with dementia and family caregivers. Journal of advanced nursing. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14714
Vancouver
Rose KM, Coop Gordon K, Schlegel EC, Mccall M, Gao Y, Ma M, et al. Smarthealth technology study protocol to improve relationships between older adults with dementia and family caregivers. Journal of advanced nursing. 2021. doi:10.1111/jan.14714. PMID: 33576064.
BibTeX
@article{rose2021-33576064,
author = {Rose, K. M. and Coop Gordon, K. and Schlegel, E. C. and Mccall, M. and Gao, Y. and Ma, M. and Lenger, K. A. and Ko, E. and others},
title = {{Smarthealth technology study protocol to improve relationships between older adults with dementia and family caregivers}},
journal = {Journal of advanced nursing},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1111/jan.14714},
pmid = {33576064},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14714}
}
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
- Results from this study will help develop and improve the Smarthealth recommendation system and determine its usefulness, feasibility, and acceptability for persons with dementia and their family caregiver.
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Participants30
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 74/100
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. 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 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 74 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of advanced nursing) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 30 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 | — / 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 33576064) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 43 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 43 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 74 out of 100. |
| Total | 74 / 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 “improves”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “improves”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.