Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
The Preventing Alzheimer's with Cognitive Training (PACT) randomized clinical trial
Nicholson JS, Hudak EM, Phillips CB, Chanti-Ketterl M, O'Brien JL, Ross LA, Lister JJ, Burke JR et al.. Contemporary clinical trials, 2022-10-28
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background To address the rising prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, effective interventions that can be widely disseminated are warranted. The Preventing Alzheimer's with Cognitive Training study (PACT) investigates a commercially available computerized cognitive training program targeting improved Useful Field of View Training (UFOVT) performance. The primary goal is to test the effectiveness of UFOVT to reduce incidence of clinically defined mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia with a secondary objective to examine if effects are moderated by plasma β-amyloid level or apolipoprotein E e4 (APOE e4) allele status. Methods/design This multisite study utilizes a randomized, controlled experimental design with blinded assessors and investigators. Individuals who are 65 years of age and older are recruited from the community. Eligible participants who demonstrate intact cognitive status (Montreal Cognitive Assessment score > 25) are randomized and asked to complete 45 sessions of either a commercially available computerized-cognitive training program (UFOVT) or computerized games across 2.5 years. After three years, participants are screened for cognitive decline. For those demonstrating decline or who are part of a random subsample, a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment is completed. Those who perform below a pre-specified level are asked to complete a clinical evaluation, including an MRI, to ascertain clinical diagnosis of normal cognition, MCI, or dementia. Participants are asked to provide blood samples for analyses of Alzheimer's disease related biomarkers. Discussion The PACT study addresses the rapidly increasing prevalence of dementia. Computerized cognitive training may provide a non-pharmaceutical option for reducing incidence of MCI or dementia to improve public health. Registration The PACT study is registered at http://Clinicaltrials.govNCT03848312.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Nicholson, J. S., Hudak, E. M., Phillips, C. B., Chanti-Ketterl, M., O'Brien, J. L., Ross, L. A., et al. (2022). The Preventing Alzheimer's with Cognitive Training (PACT) randomized clinical trial. Contemporary clinical trials. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2022.106978
Vancouver
Nicholson JS, Hudak EM, Phillips CB, Chanti-Ketterl M, O'Brien JL, Ross LA, et al. The Preventing Alzheimer's with Cognitive Training (PACT) randomized clinical trial. Contemporary clinical trials. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2022.106978. PMID: 36341846.
BibTeX
@article{nicholson2022-36341846,
author = {Nicholson, J. S. and Hudak, E. M. and Phillips, C. B. and Chanti-Ketterl, M. and O'Brien, J. L. and Ross, L. A. and Lister, J. J. and Burke, JR. and others},
title = {{The Preventing Alzheimer's with Cognitive Training (PACT) randomized clinical trial}},
journal = {Contemporary clinical trials},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1016/j.cct.2022.106978},
pmid = {36341846},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2022.106978}
}
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
- Those who perform below a pre-specified level are asked to complete a clinical evaluation, including an MRI, to ascertain clinical diagnosis of normal cognition, MCI, or dementia.
- Participants are asked to provide blood samples for analyses of Alzheimer's disease related biomarkers.
- Discussion The PACT study addresses the rapidly increasing prevalence of dementia.
- Computerized cognitive training may provide a non-pharmaceutical option for reducing incidence of MCI or dementia to improve public health.
- Registration The PACT study is registered at http://Clinicaltrials.govNCT03848312.
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 74/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size and 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 and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 45 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 74 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 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 | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomised / blinded | 2 / 2 | Randomised and blinded or placebo-controlled (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 | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 36341846) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 45 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 61 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 “cognitive-training”
8 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-training”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 8 tagged studies.