Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22499457›Full record

ArticleThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2012

Representations and practices of prevention in elderly populations: investigating acceptance to participate in and adhesion to an intervention study for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (ACCEPT study)--the need for a multidisciplinary approach.

S Andrieu, N Coley, V Gardette, J Subra, S Oustric, T Fournier, J-P Poulain, D Coniasse-Brioude, V Igier, B Vellas and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

S AndrieuINSERM UMR 1027, Toulouse, France.
N Coley
V Gardette
J Subra
S Oustric
T Fournier
J-P Poulain
D Coniasse-Brioude
V Igier
B Vellas
A Grand
ACCEPT Study Group
Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FRCentre d'Étude et de Recherche Travail Organisation Pouvoir · FRInserm · FRUnité de Recherche Interdisplinaire Octogone · FRUniversité Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the domain of Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention, various potentially protective factors have been identified in epidemiological studies. Although the results of these observational studies have been relatively consistent, the results of intervention studies remain disappointing. Methodological problems could explain these negative results, like the selection of the population; a plausible assumption is that the older people who agree to take part in these intervention studies differ from those who refuse, and are those that are least likely to benefit from such programs. The aim of this study was (i) to study the determinants of participation in and adhesion to a prevention trial in a population of older individuals via a quantitative approach using a questionnaire, (ii) to study the representations and practices of prevention in this population using a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

methodThe study population for the ACCEPT study was recruited at the time of inclusion of subjects in a prevention trial. The population was made up of persons aged 70 years or older, living at home and demonstrating some form of frailty, defined as a spontaneous memory complaint to their general practitioner or difficulties in carrying out instrumental activities of daily living. We used a quantitative approach based on the administration of a self-completed questionnaire sent to 1680 subjects having accepted to take part in the prevention trial, and to the sample of subjects meeting the inclusion criteria but having refused to take part. The qualitative approach, carried out at the moment of inclusion, involved subjects that having accepted to take part and subjects that having refused. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in order to understand the logic leading to refusal or acceptance.

conclusionThe analysis of the results will combine the viewpoints of the different disciplines. It will allow us to better understand the logic at work, to characterise the populations at risk of refusal, and perhaps to remove some of the barriers to participation in prevention programs. The identification of such barriers will provide feedback in terms of the conception and management of prevention measures.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseEpidemiologic StudiesPatient ComplianceAgedCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualEvaluation Studies as TopicFocus GroupsFollow-Up StudiesHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID22499457
PMCPMC12878078
OpenAlexW2072558947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.