Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40744455›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2025

Group cognitive stimulation therapy for people with intellectual disability and dementia: feasibility randomised controlled trial.

Afia Ali, Cheryl Francis, Sarah Hoare, Joanna Carter, Nia Goulden, Caroline S Clarke, Georgina Charlesworth, Zoe Hoare, Danny Acton, Shafia Khanum and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Afia AliWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0104-9370
Cheryl FrancisDepartment of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Sarah HoareDepartment of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Joanna CarterDepartment of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Nia GouldenNorth Wales Organisation for Randomised Trials in Health and Social Care, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Caroline S ClarkeResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4676-1257
Georgina CharlesworthDepartment of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Zoe HoareNorth Wales Organisation for Randomised Trials in Health and Social Care, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Danny ActonMillenium Centre, Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Chester, UK.
Shafia KhanumServices for People with Learning Disability, East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Akinwande OnafalujoServices for People with Learning Disability, East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Adebayo JejeloyeServices for People with Learning Disability, East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Kate BrackleyBritish Institute of Learning Disabilities, Birmingham Research Park, Edgbaston, UK.
Elisa AguirrePsychology Department, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Aimee SpectorDepartment of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGroup cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) has been shown to improve cognition and quality of life of people with dementia in multiple trials, but there has been scant research involving people with intellectual disability and dementia. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial of group CST for this population.

aimsTo assess the feasibility of participant recruitment and retention, the appropriateness of outcome measures, and the feasibility of group CST (adherence, fidelity, acceptability), as well as the feasibility of collecting data for an economic evaluation.

methodParticipants were recruited from six National Health Service trusts in England and randomised to group CST plus treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU only. Cognition, quality of life, depression, and use of health and social care services were measured at baseline and at 8-9 weeks. Qualitative interviews with participants, carers and facilitators were used to explore facilitators of and barriers to delivery of CST. Trial registration number: ISRCTN88614460.

resultsWe obtained consent from 46 participants, and 34 (73.9%) were randomised: 18 to CST and 16 to TAU. All randomised participants completed follow-up. Completion rates of outcome measures (including health economic measures) were adequate; 75.7% of sessions were delivered, and 56% of participants attended ten or more. Fidelity of delivery was of moderate quality. CST was acceptable to all stakeholders; barriers included travel distance, carer availability and sessions needing further adaptations. The estimated cost per participant of delivering CST was £602.

conclusionsThere were multiple challenges including recruitment issues, a large dropout rate before randomisation and practical issues affecting attendance. These issues would need to be addressed before conducting a larger trial.

Indexed as

Cognitive stimulation therapydementiafeasibilityintellectual disabilityrandomised controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID40744455
PMCPMC12344426

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.