Au 2014.

Methods	Parallel randomised controlled trial
Participants	Informal caregivers of people with dementia where the caregiver was the primary full‐time carer (for at least 6 months), were aged 25 years and were able to read and speak Chinese/Cantonese. The caregivers consisted of spouses, daughters/sons, and daughter/son‐in‐laws of the patients.Thirty caregivers received the intervention and 30 caregivers received standard care. The mean age of caregivers who completed the study were: intervention group 58.1 (SD 12.4); control group 55.1 (SD 11.3). Gender (intervention group, male 6 (21.4%), female 22 (78.6%) and control group, male 7 (22.6%), female 24 (77.4%). In the intervention group, education ranged from none 2 (7.1%), primary/kindergarten 6 (21.4%), junior secondary 6 (21.4%), senior secondary 8 (28.6%), form 6‐7/vocational institutes 2 (0%), college sub‐degree 2 (7.1%), college, bachelor degree 4 (14.3%). In the control group, participants education levels were: none 1 (3.2%), primary/kindergarten 12 (41.9%), junior secondary 2 (6.5%), senior secondary 10 (32.2%), form 6‐7/vocational institutes 2 (6.5%), college sub‐degree 2 (6.5%), college, bachelor degree 1 (3.2%). The mean duration in years of caregiving for the intervention group was 3.2 ± 2, and for the control group 3.3 ± 2.3. Patients: Mean age in years for the intervention group was 80.1 ± 6 and for the control group 79.9 ± 8.6. Relationship to caregivers for the intervention group were spouse 12 (42.9%), children 15 (53.6%), children‐in‐laws 3 (3.6%) and for the control group, spouse 11 (35.5%), children 14 (45.2%), children‐in‐laws 4 (12.9%), relatives 1 (6.5%). The mean duration of dementia (in years) for the intervention group was 3.4 ± 2 and for the control group was 3.3 ± 2.2. Care‐recipients in the intervention group were in receipt of average hours of care per day of 8.3 ± 7; those in the control group received a mean of 7 9.1 ± 9.5 hours of care per day.
Interventions	Title of the intervention: Telephone‐assisted pleasant‐event scheduling (TAPES) Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of TAPES on enhancing the psychological well‐being of community‐dwelling family caregivers.\ Interventionist(s): no details provided Duration: 4 weeks (2 calls for first two weeks and one call per week for weeks 3 and 4). Each call was 20 minutes in duration. Content: The intervention had three components. First, the project rationale of behavioural activation was introduced, and the Pleasant Event Schedule (revised from California Older Person’s Pleasant Events Schedule) was administered. An information package was distributed to advise on how to access social and psychological services in the community. Participants were then asked to decide on one or two activities that they would like to work on for the coming weeks. Second, six telephone calls were made. In the first phone call, participants were taught to schedule pleasant events according to the procedures of behavioural activation by working through the Pleasant Activity Planning Worksheet. To monitor individual progress, participants were asked to fill the Pleasant Event Tracking Form and the Daily Mood Record Form on a daily basis. Participants then mailed the completed progress charting forms back to the researcher. Third, concepts of adaptive coping were discussed from weeks 2 to 4: active coping, passive coping, and the goodness of fit between coping and situations, problem‐solving coping (e.g. making preparations), emotion‐regulation coping (e.g. distancing) and using situation‐appropriate strategies (e.g. stepping back and taking a break when no immediate solution was available). The compliance of treatment was closely monitored. Participants had to complete the preceding component first before moving on the next component. The completion of the tasks was recorded on the intervention protocol. Regular weekly meetings were carried out by the intervention team to review the progress of caregivers. Standardisation: no details provided Comparision group: Usual care (TAU) – treatment‐as‐usual (standard care provided by a psychogeriatric team with regular psychiatric follow‐up for the care‐recipients and support from social workers upon request).
Outcomes	1. The Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES‐D) 2. Revised Scale for Caregiving Self‐Efficacy (SE) Data were collected pre‐intervention (1‐3 days before the first intervention call), post‐intervention (1‐3 days after the last intervention call), and at follow‐up (1 month after post‐intervention).
Notes	Professional status of the interventionists unknown (awaiting author response)