SynthesisInternational journal of nursing sciences2026
Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for older adults with dementia: An umbrella review.
Synthesis in International journal of nursing sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis umbrella review aimed to synthesize systematic reviews and meta-analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) on agitation, depression, anxiety, cognitive function, and quality of life in individuals living with dementia, and to examine the stability and methodological quality of the evidence base.
methodsSystematic searches of MEDLINE (via EBSCOhost), PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were conducted from inception to February 2025. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating NPIs for older adults with dementia were included. Methodological quality was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). Evidence overlap was quantified using the corrected covered area (CCA), and effect estimates reported in the included reviews were synthesized narratively.
resultsTwelve systematic reviews, including 147 randomized controlled trials, were included. Methodological quality varied across reviews, and all reviews had at least one non-critical weakness. Review overlap was very slight (CCA = 1.8 %). Across reviews, NPIs were associated with small but consistent reductions in agitation (standardized mean difference ([SMD] -0.25, 95 %CI: -0.36 to -0.13), depression ([SMD] -0.20, 95 %CI: -0.29 to -0.11), and anxiety ([SMD] -0.21, 95 %CI:-0.34 to -0.09). A modest improvement was observed in cognitive function ([SMD] 0.22, 95 %CI:0.11 to 0.34 ), whereas no significant effect was found for quality of life ([SMD] 0.08, 95 %CI: -0.15 to 0.32). The most consistent benefits were reported for information and communication technology-based interventions, massage and touch therapies, and physical exercise. Evidence certainty was moderate for agitation, depression, and anxiety, but low or very low for cognitive function and quality of life.
conclusionNPIs were associated with small but consistent improvements in agitation, depression, anxiety, and cognitive function among older adults with dementia. Although effect sizes were modest and evidence certainty varied across outcomes, the findings support NPIs as key components of person-centered dementia care. Further high-quality research is needed to clarify optimal intervention modalities, dosage, mechanisms of action, and implementation strategies across diverse care settings.
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.