SynthesisGerontology2023
Suitability of Goal Attainment Scaling in Older Adult Populations with Neurodegenerative Disease Experiencing Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Gerontology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Communication Bridge-2 for primary progressive aphasia: A randomized controlled trial of communication intervention.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Trial
- Evaluating Goal Attainment Scaling for Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia in Rehabilitation Settings.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Article
- Adaptation of Better Conversations with Primary Progressive Aphasia to Norwegian.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Clinician and Researcher Experiences with Goal Attainment Scaling: A Qualitative Study on Opportunities and Challenges for Personalized Outcome Assessments.Patient related outcome measures · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIdentifying responsive outcome measures for assessing functional change related to cognition, communication, and quality of life for individuals with neurodegenerative disease is important for intervention design and clinical care. Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) has been used as an outcome measure to formally develop and systematically measure incremental progress toward functional, patient-centered goals in clinical settings. Evidence suggests that GAS is reliable and feasible for use in older adult populations and in adult populations with cognitive impairment, but no review has assessed the suitability of GAS in older adults with neurodegenerative disease experiencing dementia or cognitive impairment, based on responsiveness. This study conducted a systematic review to evaluate the suitability of GAS as an outcome measure for older adult populations with neurodegenerative disease experiencing dementia or cognitive impairment, based on responsiveness.
methodsThe review was registered with PROSPERO and performed by searching ten electronic scientific databases (PubMed, Medline OVID, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, OTSeeker, REHABDATA) and four registries (<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://Clinicaltrials.gov" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Clinicaltrials.gov</ext-link>, Grey Literature Report, Mednar, OpenGrey). A summary measure of responsiveness (post-intervention minus pre-intervention mean GAS T-score) was compared across eligible studies using a random-effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group.
results882 eligible articles were identified and screened by two independent reviewers. Ten studies met inclusion criteria for the final analysis. Of the ten included reports, 3 focus on all-cause dementia, 3 on multiple sclerosis, 1 on Parkinson's disease, 1 on mild cognitive impairment, 1 on Alzheimer's disease, and 1 on primary progressive aphasia. Responsiveness analyses showed pre- and post-intervention GAS goals were significantly different from zero (Z = 7.48, p < 0.001), with post-intervention GAS scores being higher than pre-intervention GAS scores. Three included studies showed a high risk of bias, 3 showed a moderate risk of bias, and 4 showed a low risk of bias. Overall risk of bias of included studies was rated as moderate.
conclusionGAS showed an improvement in goal attainment across different dementia patient populations and intervention types. The overall moderate risk of bias suggests that while bias is present across included studies (e.g., small sample size, unblinded assessors), the observed effect likely represents the true effect. This suggests that GAS is responsive to functional change and may be suitable for use in older adult populations with neurodegenerative disease experiencing dementia or cognitive impairment.
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.