Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31647125›Full record

Trial reportResearch in nursing & health2019

Attention control group activities and perceived benefit in a trial of a behavioral intervention for older adults.

Sarah E LaFave, Marianne Granbom, Thomas K M Cudjoe, Alex Gottsch, Gerard Shorb, Sarah L Szanton

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Research in nursing & health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06229444 (Predict + Protect), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06229444 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Predict + Protect: A Randomized Controlled Trial Exploring the Effectiveness of a Predictive Health Education Intervention on the Adoption of Protective Behaviors Related to Influenza-like Illness (ILI)

TypeinterventionalSponsorEvidation HealthRan2024 to 2024Enrolled17,043ConditionsInfluenza, Influenza A, Influenza B, COVID-19ArmsILI Predictive Alerts, Reactive Content, and Proactive Content, ILI Predictive Alerts, Reactive Content, Proactive Content, No Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Point-of-care tools to support optometric care provision to people with age-related macular degeneration: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Using an aromatherapy intervention withInternational journal of nursing sciences · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Sarah E LaFaveCenter for Innovative Care in Aging, School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0002-0525-4259
Marianne GranbomCenter for Innovative Care in Aging, School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0001-7456-2039
Thomas K M CudjoeCenter on Aging and Health, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland.
Alex GottschDuke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina.
Gerard ShorbSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Sarah L SzantonCenter for Innovative Care in Aging, School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

Hopkins Center to Promote resilience in persons and families living with multiple chronic conditions (the PROMOTE Center)P30NR018093 · NINR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CAMPBELL, JACQUELYN CUTLER · 2018 to 2022
$3.1M
Reducing disability via a bundled bio-behavioral-environmental approachR01AG040100 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SZANTON, SARAH L · 2012 to 2016
$3.0M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG040100NINR NIH HHS P30 NR018093
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Researchers trialing behavioral interventions often use attention control groups, but few publish details on attention control activities or perceived benefit. Attention control groups receive the same dose of interpersonal interaction as intervention participants but no other elements of the intervention, to control for the benefits of attention that may come from behavioral interventions. Because intervention success is analyzed compared to control conditions, it is useful to examine attention control content and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to report on attention control visit activities and their perceived benefit in a randomized control trial. The trial tested an aging-in-place intervention comprised of a series of participant goal-directed visits facilitated by an occupational therapist, nurse, and handyman. The attention control group participants received visits from a lay person. We report on the number and length of visits received, types of visit activities that participants chose, and how much visit time was spent on each activity, based on the attention visitor's records. We report on participant perceptions of benefit based on a 10-item Likert-scale survey. The attention control group participants (n = 148) were cognitively intact, at least 65 years old, with at least one Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. Attention control group participants most often chose conversation (20.1% of visit time), and playing games (18.7%), as visit activities. The majority of attention control group participants (63.4%) reported "a great deal" of perceived benefit. Attention control group visits may be an appropriate comparison in studies of behavioral interventions for community-dwelling older adults.

Indexed as

AttentionBehavior TherapyControl GroupsIndependent LivingAgedFemaleHumansMaleQuality of Lifeattention controlbehavioral interventioncommunity-dwelling older adults

Identifiers

PMID31647125
PMCPMC6858509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.