ArticleBMJ open2022
Preferences of people with mild cognitive impairment for physical activity interventions in China: protocol for a discrete choice experiment study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A mobile exercise management application based on exercise preferences in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a development and usability study.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Patterns in Attribute Selection and Development Reporting in Patient Preference Studies Between 2007-2024: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2026Article
- Development of a discrete choice experiment-an instrument to weight the preferences of registered nursing undergraduates to future employers: a descriptive study.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Discrete Choice Experiment in Evaluating Preferences for Physical Activity: A Mixed-Methods Study of Attributes and Their Levels.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionExercise interventions are important non-pharmacological interventions for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but patients with MCI have poor compliance and there is no consistent strategy for exercise interventions. Understanding the needs and preferences of MCI patients allows for the development of effective and acceptable exercise intervention programmes that achieve the goals of patient-centred care. This study uses a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to measure and quantify MCI patients' preferences for exercise interventions, and aims at (1) identifying and exploring which elements of exercise intervention programmes are essential for MCI patients; (2) measuring MCI patients' preferences for exercise interventions and summarising relevant characteristics that may influence preference choices and (3) determining whether these preferences vary by participant characteristics and classifying the population types based on the sociodemographic characteristics of the participants. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A DCE will be conducted to explore MCI patients' preferences for exercise interventions. We conducted a systematic literature review and extensive qualitative work to select the best attributes to develop the design of DCE. A partial factorial survey design was generated through an orthogonal experimental design. We will conduct a questionnaire survey in one city each in the eastern (Nanjing), western (Xining), southern (Zhuhai) and northern (Beijing) parts of China and reach the planned sample size (n=278). Final data will be analysed using a mixed logit model and a latent class model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Nanjing Medical University (2021-666). All participants will be required to provide informed consent. Our findings will be disseminated and shared with interested patient groups and the general public through online blogs, policy briefs, national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.