MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404693155 · doi:10.2196/64718

Internet-Based Dementia Prevention Intervention (DementiaRisk): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial and Knowledge Translation

2024· article· en· W4404693155 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Anthony J Levinson, Stephanie Ayers, Sandra Clark, Rebekah Woodburn, Maureen Dobbins, Dante Duarte, Roland Grad, Nick Kates, Sharon Marr, Doug Oliver, Αλεξάνδρα Παπαϊωάννου, Karen Saperson, Henry Siu, Gillian Strudwick, Richard Sztramko, Sarah Neil‐Sztramko

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthMcGill UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintDementiaRandomized controlled trialThe InternetProtocol (science)Knowledge translationIntervention (counseling)MedicinePsychologyComputer scienceAlternative medicineWorld Wide WebNursingKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research has shown that engaging in a range of healthy lifestyles or behavioral factors can help reduce the risk of developing dementia. Improved knowledge of modifiable risk factors for dementia may help engage people to reduce their risk, with beneficial impacts on individual and public health. Moreover, many guidelines emphasize the importance of providing education and web-based resources for dementia prevention. Internet-based interventions may be effective, but few have been studied rigorously or widely disseminated. We created DementiaRisk, an award-winning, web- and email-based education platform for the public focused on modifiable risk factors, featuring multimedia e-learning and email "microlearning" content, to help raise awareness and improve knowledge of actions to reduce dementia risk. OBJECTIVE: This protocol describes a randomized controlled trial to (1) evaluate whether exposure to DementiaRisk changes knowledge of dementia risk factors, intention to engage in risk reduction activities, and health behaviors related to dementia risk reduction and to (2) explore qualitative aspects including participants' engagement and satisfaction with the intervention and barriers and facilitators to use. METHODS: Using a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, this study conducts a quantitative analysis followed by a qualitative inquiry to evaluate outcomes and feasibility. In total, 485 participants will be recruited on the web and randomly assigned to 2 groups: one accessing DementiaRisk and the other receiving alternative e-learning on mild cognitive impairment. Assessments will be delivered on the web at baseline (T1), at 4 weeks (T2), and at 2 months after the intervention (T3). Knowledge will be assessed using items from the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale, intentions to engage in risk reduction activities will be assessed using items in line with current evidence, and health behaviors related to dementia risk reduction will be assessed using items from the Godin-Shephard Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire along with additional questions related to a range of health status domains. Outcomes and feasibility will be assessed using the Information Assessment Method for patients and consumers. A linear mixed effects model will be used to examine the relationship between each outcome score by group and time point. RESULTS: This study was approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board on August 24, 2022 (project ID 14886) and received funding in February 2023. Recruitment took place from March 28, 2023, to April 28, 2023, with the final participants completing the intervention by August 18, 2023. Analyses and interpretation of data are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: DementiaRisk is a readily scalable, technology-enhanced solution for dementia prevention education. It has been designed using evidence-based principles of multimedia learning. It has the potential to scale and spread widely using the open internet, so it may be able to reach a wider audience than traditional in-person educational interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05383118; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05383118. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64718.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0100.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1350.025

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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→