Trial reportInternational psychogeriatrics2024
Measuring clinically relevant change in apathy symptoms in ADMET and ADMET 2.
Trial report in International psychogeriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of physical exercise on apathy in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAmong participants with Alzheimer's disease (AD) we estimated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in apathy symptom severity on three scales.
designRetrospective anchor- and distribution-based analyses of change in apathy symptom scores.
settingApathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial (ADMET) and ADMET 2 randomized controlled trials conducted at three and ten clinics specialized in dementia care in United States and Canada, respectively.
participantsTwo hundred and sixty participants (60 ADMET, 200 ADMET 2) with clinically significant apathy in Alzheimer's disease. MEASUREMENTS: The Clinical Global Impression of Change in Apathy scale was used as the anchor measure and the MCID on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory - Apathy (NPI-A), Dementia Apathy Interview and Rating (DAIR), and Apathy Evaluation Scale-Informant (AES-I) were estimated with linear mixed models across all study visits. The estimated thresholds were evaluated with performance metrics.
resultsAmong the MCID was a decrease of four points (95% CI: -4.0 to -4.8) on the NPI-A, 0.56 points (95% CI: -0.47 to -0.65) on the DAIR, and three points on the AES-I (95% CI: -0.9 to -5.4). Distribution-based analyses were largely consistent with the anchor-based analyses. The MCID across the three measures showed ∼60% accuracy. Sensitivity analyses found that MMSE scores and apathy severity at baseline influenced the estimated MCID.
conclusionsMCIDs for apathy on three scales will help evaluate treatment efficacy at the individual level. However, the modest correspondence between MCID and clinical impression of change suggests the need to consider other scales.
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.