ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023
Retention of Study Partners in Longitudinal Studies of Alzheimer Disease.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of learning about financial compensation on enrollment in Alzheimer's disease longitudinal research.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Trial
- Outreach, Recruitment and Engagement Cores of NIA-designated Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers: Current strategies and future directions.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Study partners' views on remuneration in longitudinal Alzheimer's disease research.Alzheimer's & dementia. Behavior & socioeconomics of aging · 2025Article
- Return of research results across the Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers network.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Impact of study partner replacement in a mild cognitive impairment clinical trial.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudy partners are required for all participants at Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers (ADRCs). Study partners' attitudes and beliefs may contribute to missed visits and negatively impact retention of participants in longitudinal AD studies.
objectiveStudy partners (N = 212) of participants (Clinical Dementia Rating® [CDR]≤2) at four ADRCs were randomly surveyed to examine their facilitators and barriers to continued participation in AD studies.
methodsReasons for participation were analyzed with factor analysis and regression analysis. Effects of complaints and goal fulfillment on attendance were estimated with fractional logistic models. Open-ended responses were characterized with a Latent Dirichlet Allocation topic model.
resultsStudy partners participated for personal benefit and altruism. They emphasized personal benefits more when their participants had a CDR > 0 than when they had a CDR = 0. This difference declined with participant age. The majority of study partners rated their ADRC participation as positive and meeting their goals. Although half reported at least one complaint, very few regretted participating. Those who reported that ADRC participation fulfilled their goals or had fewer complaints were more likely to have perfect attendance. Study partners requested more feedback about test results and better management of study visits.
conclusionStudy partners are motivated by both personal and altruistic goals. The salience of each goal depends on their trust in researchers and the participant's cognitive status and age. Retention may improve with perceived goal fulfillment and fewer complaints. Potential areas for improving retention are providing more information about the participant's test results and better management of study visits.
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.