ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2025
Three versus six sessions of problem-solving training with or without boosters for care partners of adults with dementia (CaDeS): a randomised controlled optimization trial.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04748666 (Problem Solving Training), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Problem Solving Training (PST) for English- and Spanish-speaking Care Partners of Adults With Alzheimer's and Alzheimer'S-related Dementia
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Problem-solving training to improve caregiver burden and depressive symptoms among dementia caregivers: personal and clinical factors of responders vs. non-responders.Frontiers in public health · 2025Trial
- Considering culture to optimise psychosocial treatments for caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.Lancet regional health. Americas · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Problem-Solving Training/Descubriendo Soluciones Juntos (PST/DSJ) can improve emotional consequences of caregiving. We assessed the number of sessions and boosters needed for reducing caregiver burden and depressive symptoms among Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) care partners. Methods: We conducted a randomised factorial-design trial of bilingual PST/DSJ among ADRD care partners (NCT04748666). Participants were randomly assigned (blocks of 8 stratified by language) to 3 PST/DSJ sessions with (n = 19) or without (n = 21) boosters or 6 PST/DSJ sessions with (n = 28) or without (n = 29) boosters. The Zarit Burden Interview measured caregiver burden and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) measured depressive symptoms at baseline, after sessions, and after boosters. Findings: Ninety-seven care partners participated in the study (93% of those randomised) between June 2021 and July 2023 (n = 80 women, 83%). Ninety-five were included in intention-to-treat analysis (98% retention). For caregiver burden, all groups improved significantly over time (Estimate = -0.40, p = 0.004, Cohen's D = 0.31), with no difference between intervention groups. For depressive symptoms, there was a main effect of time (Estimate = -0.16, p = 0.005, Cohen's D = 0.33) indicating overall improvement regardless of group. Within group effect sizes (Cohen's D = 0.17-0.51) suggest larger improvement with 6 sessions (Cohen's D = 0.28-0.51) than 3 sessions (Cohen's D = 0.17-0.41). No adverse events occurred. Interpretation: Neither the number of sessions nor boosters resulted in differential efficacy for caregiver burden and depressive symptoms, though six sessions and boosters yielded the largest effect sizes. These results can inform the implementation of an evidence-based, bilingual problem-solving intervention to reduce burden and improve mood among diverse dementia care partners. Funding: Texas Alzheimer's Research and Care Consortium [TARCC 2020-06-25-CR].
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.