ArticlePloS one2021
Design and evaluation of a cognitive health education pilot program according to the RE-AIM framework.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community-based interventions for cognitive health in older adults: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Co-Producing and Evaluating a Culturally Inclusive Dementia Education Initiative: A Multimethod Study Protocol.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMost formats of currently used community-based health education for cognitive impairment prevention are limited to one-way communication, such as distributing leaflets, pasting posters, or holding a lecture, and they lack comprehensive evaluation. Here we aim to design, test, and evaluate a novel pilot cognitive health education program combined with psychosocial interventions (CHECPI).
methodsWe designed the CHECPI program and tested it among adults aged 60 and over in an aging-friendly community in 2018. Multidimensional cognitive functions were measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) before and three months after the CHECPI program. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were performed based on the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework to evaluate the program. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to assess changes in multidimensional cognitive functions.
resultsThe CHECPI program was comprised of 12 courses and introduced 5 kinds of psychosocial interventions. Reach: 28 older adults participated in the program, of whom most were female (n = 22) and younger elderly with an average age of 65.32 years. Effectiveness: 19 participants finished≥6 courses as well as the follow-up survey. Although their MoCA scores did not improve significantly, they had increased their visuospatial ability significantly (with the average score increasing by 0.42). Adoption: the community officers, lecturers, and participants highly recommended the program, but they agreed that the lack of professional instructors may hinder its popularization. Implementation: the program was implemented in full accordance with the pre-program design. Maintenance: three months after the program, 17 participants had maintained at least one of the seven healthy behaviors that were introduced in the program.
conclusionsYounger female elderly were more willing to participate in the program. It enhanced participants' visuospatial ability, but a sufficient number of professional instructors are crucial for large-scale promotion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.