Home › Research › Caregiving
Technology caregiver intervention for Alzheimer's disease (I-CARE): Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Brain CareNotes
Miriam Jocelyn Rodriguez, Vanessa Martinez Kercher, Evan J Jordan, April Savoy, Jordan R Hill, Nicole Werner, Arthur Owora, Pete Castelluccio et al.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2023-09-14
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
The enrollment rate was acceptable despite pandemic related challenges (53/60 target recruitment sample). Among randomized individuals, there was a retention rate of 85% and data completion was attained for 81.5% of those allocated to usual care and 88.5% of those allocated to Brain CareNotes. Mean caregiver-reported app usability at 6 months was 72.5 (IQR 70.0-90.0) on the System Usability Scale-considered "Good to Excellent"-and user acceptance was reasonable as indicated by 85%-90% of caregivers reporting they would intend to use the app to some degree in the next 6 months, if able. Regarding intervention effect, although differences in outcome measures between the groups were not statistically significant, compared to baseline, we found a reduction of caregiver burden (NPI-Caregiver Distress) of 1.0 at 3 months and 0.7 at 6 months for those in the intervention group. BPSD (NPI Total Score) was also reduced from baseline by 4.0 at 3 months and by 0.5 at 6 months. Brain CareNotes is a highly scalable, usable and acceptable mobile caregiver intervention. Future studies should focus on testing Brain CareNotes on a larger sample size to examine efficacy of reducing caregiver burden and BPSD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Rodriguez, M. J., Kercher, V. M., Jordan, E. J., Savoy, A., Hill, J. R., Werner, N., et al. (2023). Technology caregiver intervention for Alzheimer's disease (I-CARE): Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Brain CareNotes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18591
Vancouver
Rodriguez MJ, Kercher VM, Jordan EJ, Savoy A, Hill JR, Werner N, et al. Technology caregiver intervention for Alzheimer's disease (I-CARE): Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Brain CareNotes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2023. doi:10.1111/jgs.18591. PMID: 37706540.
BibTeX
@article{rodriguez2023-37706540,
author = {Rodriguez, Miriam Jocelyn and Kercher, Vanessa Martinez and Jordan, Evan J and Savoy, April and Hill, Jordan R and Werner, Nicole and Owora, Arthur and Castelluccio, Pete and others},
title = {{Technology caregiver intervention for Alzheimer's disease (I-CARE): Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Brain CareNotes}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1111/jgs.18591},
pmid = {37706540},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18591}
}
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
- The enrollment rate was acceptable despite pandemic related challenges (53/60 target recruitment sample).
- Among randomized individuals, there was a retention rate of 85% and data completion was attained for 81.5% of those allocated to usual care and 88.5% of those allocated to Brain CareNotes.
- Mean caregiver-reported app usability at 6 months was 72.5 (IQR 70.0-90.0) on the System Usability Scale-considered "Good to Excellent"-and user acceptance was reasonable as indicated by 85%-90% of caregivers reporting they would intend to use the app to some degree in the next 6 months, if able.
- Regarding intervention effect, although differences in outcome measures between the groups were not statistically significant, compared to baseline, we found a reduction of caregiver burden (NPI-Caregiver Distress) of 1.0 at 3 months and 0.7 at 6 months for those in the intervention group.
- BPSD (NPI Total Score) was also reduced from baseline by 4.0 at 3 months and by 0.5 at 6 months.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →
Study details
- Participants53
- Effect sizeor 81.5; 88.5%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 80/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 45 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 80 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| 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 | 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 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 53 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 | — / 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 37706540) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 45 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 80 out of 100. |
| Total | 80 / 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 Caregiving
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.