Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35883143›Full record

Trial reportTrials2022

The APPLE Tree programme: Active Prevention in People at risk of dementia through Lifestyle, bEhaviour change and Technology to build REsiliEnce-randomised controlled trial.

M Poppe, L Duffy, N L Marchant, J A Barber, R Hunter, N Bass, A M Minihane, K Walters, P Higgs, P Rapaport and 11 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

21 authors.

M PoppeUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
L DuffyUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
N L MarchantUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
J A BarberDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.
R HunterResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
N BassUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
A M MinihaneNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
K WaltersResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.
P HiggsUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
P RapaportUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
I A LangCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
S Morgan-TrimmerCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
J HuntleyUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Z WalkerUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
H BrodatyCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
H C KalesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, USA.
K RitchieInstitut de Neurosciences de Montpellier (INM), Montpellier, France.
A BurtonDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
J WenbornUCL Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
A BetzQueen Mary University London, Centre for Psychiatry and Mental Health, Wolfson Institute for Population Health, London, UK.
C CooperQueen Mary University London, Centre for Psychiatry and Mental Health, Wolfson Institute for Population Health, London, UK. Claudia.cooper@qmul.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2777-7616

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/S010408/1National Institute for Health Research ES/S010408/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLarge-scale trials of multidomain interventions show that modifying lifestyle and psychological risk factors can slow cognitive decline. We aim to determine if a lower intensity, personally tailored secondary dementia prevention programme for older people with subjective or mild objective memory decline, informed by behaviour change theory, reduces cognitive decline over 2 years.

methodsA multi-site, single-blind randomised controlled trial recruiting 704 older adults at high dementia risk due to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or subjective cognitive decline (SCD). Participants are randomised using 1:1 allocation ratio to the APPLE Tree intervention versus control arm (dementia prevention information), stratified by site. The intervention explores and implements strategies to promote healthy lifestyle, increase pleasurable activities and social connections and improve long-term condition self-management. Two facilitators trained and supervised by a clinical psychologist deliver ten, 1-h group video call sessions over 6 months (approximately every fortnight), video-call 'tea breaks' (less structured, facilitated social sessions) in intervening weeks and individual goal-setting phone calls every 2 weeks. From 6 to 12 months, participants meet monthly for 'tea breaks', with those not attending receiving monthly goal-setting phone calls. Participants receive a food delivery, pedometer and website access to cognitive training and information about lifestyle modification. Follow-ups for all outcome measures are at 12 and 24 months. The primary outcome is cognition (Neuropsychological Test Battery (NTB) score) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and wellbeing and lifestyle factors the intervention targets (diet, vascular risk, body weight, activity, sleep, anxiety, depression, social networks and loneliness, alcohol intake and smoking). Participants from purposively selected sites participate in qualitative process evaluation interviews, which will be analysed using thematic analytic methods. DISCUSSION: If effective, the intervention design, involving remote delivery and non-clinical facilitators, would facilitate intervention roll-out to older people with memory concerns.

trial registrationISRCTN17325135 . Registration date 27 November 2019.

Indexed as

DementiaMalusAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansLife StyleQuality of LifeSingle-Blind MethodTeaTechnologyTeaRandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID35883143
PMCPMC9315085

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.