Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33336529›Full record

SynthesisPsychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society2021

Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non-pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review.

Bharath Du, Monisha Lakshminarayanan, Murali Krishna, Sridhar Vaitheswaran, Mina Chandra, Shaji Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Satyapal Puri Goswami, Thara Rangaswamy, Aimee Spector, Charlotte R Stoner

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Reinventing "N" in the A/T/N framework: The case for digital.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Bharath DuFoundation for Research and Advocacy in Mental health (FRAMe), Mysore, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7767-333X
Monisha LakshminarayananSchizophrenia Research Foundation, Chennai, India.
Murali KrishnaFoundation for Research and Advocacy in Mental health (FRAMe), Mysore, India.
Sridhar VaitheswaranSchizophrenia Research Foundation, Chennai, India.
Mina ChandraAtal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Medical Sciences and Dr Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Delhi, India.
Shaji Kunnukattil SivaramanGovernment Medical College, Thrissur, India.
Satyapal Puri GoswamiAll India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysore, India.
Thara RangaswamySchizophrenia Research Foundation, Chennai, India.
Aimee SpectorUniversity College London, London, UK.
Charlotte R StonerUniversity of Greenwich, London, UK.
Schizophrenia Research Foundation · INFoundation for Research in Community Health · INAtal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Medical Sciences and Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital · INDr. S.R. Chandrasekhar Institute of Speech and Hearing · INGovernment Medical College · INUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Greenwich · GB

Funding

Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases (GACD) MH02Indian Council of Medical ResearchIndian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) UK Medical Research Council (MRC)Medical Research Council MR/S004009/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite high burden of dementia in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), only a small number of clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) have been conducted in these settings. It is essential that such trials use appropriate outcome measures that are methodologically robust and culturally appropriate to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. We carried out a systematic review to examine the evidence base and psychometric properties of measures employed in these studies in LMICs. A systematic search of published literature on randomised controlled trials (RCT) of psychosocial interventions for PwD in LMICs between 2008 and April 2020 was carried out. Measures employed in each of the eligible studies were identified and through a focused search, we further explored the evidence base and psychometric properties employing Terwee criteria. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The review identified 41 measures from 17 RCTS which fulfilled eligibility criteria and they examined effectiveness across the domains of cognition (n = 16), behaviour and psychological symptoms (n = 11) and quality of life (n = 8). Of these 41, we were able to access relevant literature only for 18 and they were subject to psychometric analysis. Psychometric properties of these 18 instruments were at best modest, with Terwee scores ranging from 3 (low) to 15 (moderate). A majority of the studies were from China (n = 5) and Brazil (n = 6). The evidence base for the routinely employed measures in RCTs of non-pharmacological interventions for PwD in LMICs is limited. The quality of adaptation and validation of these instruments is variable and studies are largely uninformative about their psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness to the study setting. There is an urgent need to develop scientifically robust instruments in LMIC settings that can be confidently employed to measure outcomes in trials of psychosocial interventions for PwD.

Indexed as

DementiaDeveloping CountriesBrazilChinaHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePsychometricsdementialow middle income countriesnon-pharmacological therapyoutcome measurespsychometric properties

Identifiers

PMID33336529
PMCPMC7986620
OpenAlexW3116799392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.