Skip to main content
. 2023 Jan 31;2023(1):CD005562. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005562.pub3

Breuil 1994.

Study characteristics
Methods RCT
Participants N = 61 (37F/24M)
Diagnosis of dementia (DSM‐III) (90% have Alzheimer's disease)
Age 77.1 (range 61‐93)
Mean MMSE 21.5 (range 9‐29)
Outpatients
Interventions Cognitive stimulation (N = 29)
Treatment‐as‐usual (N = 27)
Outcomes Cognition: MMSE, CERAD
ADL: ECA scale rated by family members
Notes 60 minutes, 2 times a week, for 5 weeks
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Described as randomised, but no details of randomisation reported
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk No details of randomisation reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes Low risk Cognitive assessments made by an assessor blind to group allocation; ADL assessment open
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Five patients excluded as did not attend all training and evaluation sessions (3 from treatment group, 2 from controls) ‐ reasons for non‐attendance not provided
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Data on all measures reported, except for several scales which were deemed unsuitable due to ceiling effects
Other bias ‐ training and supervision Unclear risk Two therapists ‐ psychologist and physician ‐ training in cognitive stimulation techniques not specified
Other bias ‐ treatment manual Unclear risk Described as a 'cognitive stimulation programme' and some examples given, but no information regarding a manual or protocol