| Methods |
An RCT comparing a collaborative memory intervention vs an identical intervention delivered individually, and vs a control condition, in people with mild to moderate AD and vascular dementia and their caregiving spouses |
| Participants |
30 dyads, including a community dwelling person with mild to moderate AD or vascular dementia, according to DSM‐IV, who had received the diagnosis within 8 months before the intervention, and their caregiving spouse
Mean age of participants with dementia was 75.4 years |
| Interventions |
In the collaborative intervention condition (PwD; n = 10), participant dyads practised together strategies to enhance everyday mnemonic and occupational performance, with focus on spaced retrieval and hierarchical cueing
In the individual programme (PwD; n = 10), participants received the same training but without involvement of the caregiver
Both programmes involved 1‐hour weekly sessions over a period of 8 weeks and were delivered by a research assistant
Dyads in the control condition (PwD; n = 10) received no intervention |
| Outcomes |
Outcomes included individual and collaborative recall. Burden and depressive symptoms among caregivers were also assessed |
| Country |
Sweden |
| Registration status |
No information provided; presumed to be unregistered |
| Conflict of Interests |
Not stated |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Although study authors described an RCT, they provided no information on the method of randomisation |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
High risk |
Study authors did not mention allocation concealment; for this reason, we assumed this was not done |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Study authors did not mention blinding of participants; study included a passive control condition, so blinding was not possible |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
No blinding; the outcome could have been influenced by lack of blinding |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
No data were missing, other than memory test performance for 1 participant; no reason was given for this |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
High risk |
Study authors did not present results for all outcomes mentioned in the "Methods" section |
| Other bias |
Low risk |
Study appears to be free of other sources of bias |
