MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409011801 · doi:10.2196/67545

Videoconference-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Family Caregivers of People With Dementia: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4409011801 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Areum Han, Robert A. Oster, Hon K. Yuen, Jeremy Jenkins, Jessica Hawkins, Lauren Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoeducationRandomized controlled trialMedicineFamily caregiversAcceptance and commitment therapyMental healthCaregiver burdenPopulationDementiaQuality of life (healthcare)AnxietyIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers of individuals with dementia face significant mental health challenges. Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) has emerged as a promising intervention for improving these caregivers' mental health. While various delivery modes of ACT have been explored, there is a need for evidence on the efficacy of videoconference-delivered ACT programs for this population. OBJECTIVE: This pilot randomized controlled trial, conducted in the United States, aims to assess the effects of a videoconference-delivered, therapist-guided ACT program on reducing depressive symptoms and improving other mental health outcomes among family caregivers with depression who give care to individuals with dementia, compared to a control group that received psychoeducation materials only. METHODS: This 2-arm, parallel-group pilot randomized controlled trial randomly assigned 33 family caregivers to either a 10-week videoconference-delivered ACT program (n=16, 48%) or a control group that received psychoeducation materials alone (n=17, 52%). Depressive symptoms (primary outcome) were measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Secondary outcomes included anxiety, stress, psychological quality of life (QoL), caregiver burden, predeath grief, guilt, and ACT process measures. Outcomes were assessed in the pretest, posttest (10-12 weeks after pretest), and a 3-month follow-up (3 months after posttest, approximately 5-6 months after pretest). An intent-to-treat approach was used for all outcome analyses. Linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures were used to analyze outcomes. RESULTS: The ACT group reported significantly greater improvements in stress (P=.043) and psychological QoL (P=.014) in the posttest compared to the control group. Within the ACT group, participants experienced a significant decrease in depressive symptoms, with a mean (SE) change of -6.09 (1.16) points (95% CI -8.42 to -3.76; P<.001) in the posttest and -6.71 (1.45) points (95% CI -9.63 to -3.81; P<.001) in the 3-month follow-up. These changes exceed the estimated minimal clinically important difference on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. In addition, the ACT group reported significant improvements in anxiety, stress, psychological QoL, caregiver burden, predeath grief, guilt, values-driven action, and experiential avoidance at both posttest and 3-month follow-up. A sensitivity analysis, excluding 1 participant with near-outlier data, revealed statistically significant between-group differences in depressive symptoms at posttest (P=.037); stress at posttest (P<.001) and in 3-month follow-up (P=.001); psychological QoL at posttest (P<.001); caregiver burden at posttest (P=.003) and in 3-month follow-up (P=.003); predeath grief in 3-month follow-up (P=.031); and values-driven action at posttest (P=.032). CONCLUSIONS: The videoconference-delivered ACT program showed promise in improving mental health outcomes and ACT processes among family caregivers with depression who give care to individuals with dementia. Future studies should aim to replicate these findings with larger, more diverse caregiver populations and explore the long-term efficacy of videoconference-delivered ACT programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05043441; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05043441.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.354 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207