MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172770773 · doi:10.2196/30514

A Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating the Feasibility of a Low-Intensity Psychological Intervention for Fear of Memory Loss and Quality of Life in Older Adults: Protocol for the Reducing Fear and Avoidance of Memory Loss (REFRAME) Study

2021· article· en· W3172770773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patricia O’Loughlin, Pavithra Pavithra, John W. Regan, Marc Bennett, Rachel Knight, Bert Lenaert, Melissa Marquez, Michelle Taddeo, James W. Griffith, Rita Shapiro, Francesca R Farina

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoeducationMindfulnessRandomized controlled trialDementiaQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyClinical psychologyAnxietyPsychosocialIntervention (counseling)CognitionPsychiatryMedicineDiseasePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dementia is the most feared disease associated with aging. Prolonged fears about memory loss and dementia can have harmful consequences even in the absence of cognitive decline. Fear of dementia is associated with poorer health outcomes and psychological well-being and increased memory failures in older adults. OBJECTIVE: We will conduct a randomized controlled trial to determine the feasibility of a tailored, web-based mindfulness program to reduce fear of memory loss and increase quality of life in older adults experiencing heightened fear. METHODS: Eighty participants will be recruited and divided into 2 groups (40 in each group). One group will receive psychoeducation plus mindfulness training. A second group will receive psychoeducation, mindfulness training, and additional modules targeting maladaptive behavioral avoidance (ie, social and cognitive withdrawal). RESULTS: Our recent etiological model posits that maladaptive behavioral avoidance strategies critically underlie psychosocial dysfunction associated with fear of memory loss. Thus, we predict better outcomes in the second group, including reduced fear of memory loss (primary outcome), Alzheimer disease, anxiety, and subjective memory failures, and increased quality of life (secondary outcomes). Outcome measures will be applied at 5 time points (before, baseline, interim, and after the intervention, and at 3-month follow-up). Data will be analyzed using mixed models and correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study will contribute to the current literature on dementia-related fear and improve our understanding of how to effectively address and reduce these fears. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04821960; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04821960. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/30514.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.320
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207