AgingEMMINCT04088136
Everyday Memory Intervention
A study testing Everyday Metacognitive Memory Intervention in people with Aging, run by Georgia Institute of Technology at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Evaluates an intervention designed to improve everyday memory function, contrasting people receiving the intervention with a group that receives traditional memory strategy training. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 70 to 85 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Aging
- What is being tested?
- Everyday Metacognitive Memory Intervention
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 68 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 15 Mar 2021to 10 Dec 2021
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 70 to 85 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 70 - 85 years of age
- in fair to good health
- free of major neurocognitive impairment
- English speaking
- endorsed Smartphone and computer users (or willing to learn)
Who cannot join
- diagnosis of any major neurological problems (e.g. stroke, Parkinson's disease, dementia)
- 1.5 SD below age-normed mean (or lower) on the TICS
- low computer and smart phone literacy
- and poor self-rated health.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Enhancing Older Adults' Everyday Memory Function
Evaluates an intervention designed to improve everyday memory function, contrasting people receiving the intervention with a group that receives traditional memory strategy training.
Read the detailed description
This project seeks to develop and validate a novel approach to training everyday memory functioning in older adults. The approach (1) trains people to use simple but effective memory skills that have broad applicability in everyday life and (2) shapes a set of skills and habits of mind that will increase the likelihood of effective use of skills and memory aids. It is based on a metacognitive perspective on self-regulation in cognitively demanding situations and informed by recent theories about how suboptimal habit patterns can be altered. The approach has not yet been used in an everyday memory intervention in high-functioning, community-dwelling older adults. The proposed research validates ecological momentary assessment methods to get actual behavioral measures of forgetting in everyday life. It then uses these procedures in a randomized experiment that contrasts the everyday memory intervention group with a traditional memory-strategy training group. The hypothesis is that the everyday memory training intervention will reduce everyday memory errors and memory complaints, whereas the memory strategy training will alter strategy use and memory performance, with little cross-over effect. The hypothesized pattern will establish the explicit benefits of our everyday memory intervention procedures and demonstrate the limitation of standard memory training for that purpose.
- Conditions
- Aging
- Being tested
- Everyday Metacognitive Memory Intervention, Memory Strategy Control Intervention
- Keywords
- everyday memory, ecological momentary assessment, memory complaint, metacognition, mnemonics, external aids
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Everyday Metacognitive Memory InterventionBehavioural
Provides training in use of techniques and procedures to enhance proactive self-regulatory control over everyday memory demands, including strategies for learning information, planning for meeting everyday goals, and monitoring of efficacy of goal pursuit.
Memory Strategy Control InterventionBehavioural
Trains use of standard mnemonic techniques such as imagery and sentence generation for learning new associations and organizational and distinctiveness-based strategies for learning sets of items (e.g., word lists).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Everyday Metacognitive Memory | Experimental | Training in techniques for managing memory demands in everyday life Receives: Behavioral: Everyday Metacognitive Memory Intervention |
| Memory Strategy Control | Active comparator | Trains the use of memory strategies for learning new associations and concepts Receives: Behavioral: Memory Strategy Control Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Everyday Memory Failures
Across the data collection period, participants audio recorded descriptions of their memory failures on a smartphone app. The audio recordings were transcribed and then cleaned and qualitatively coded so that the number of memory failures each participant reported during the data collection period could be counted. The data was qualitatively coded to ensure an accurate count of the number of memory failures per participant without counting duplicate events or accidental reports. Average daily number of reported memory failures from EMA \& daily diaries is reported.
Measured: minimum 8 day period after training on app prior to posttest
Prospective Memory Lab Contacts
Number of successfully completed lab contacts (maximum of 4)
Measured: Two weeks prior to posttest
Prospective Memory Lab Contact Efficiency
median absolute time deviation (in minutes) from scheduled lab contact for completed contacts
Measured: Two weeks prior to posttest
Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: ATM Task (Number of Errors)
Computerized task to simulate use of an ATM machine. Measure: number of errors
Measured: posttest only
Czaja Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: Prescription Refill Task (Number of Errors)
Computerized task to simulate use of an automated telephone program to refill prescriptions. Measure: Number of errors
Measured: posttest only
Free Recall Test
Computerized task to present 30 concrete nouns, 6 from 5 taxonomic categories (Hultsch, Hertzog, Dixon, \& Small, 1998) Measure is proportion of 30 words recalled
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Associative Recall Test
Computerized task to present 40 concrete-concrete associatively unrelated noun pairs (Hertzog, Sinclair, \& Dunlosky, 2010) Outcome is proportion of 40 words correctly recalled.
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Story Recall
gist recall of narrative story (total number of propositions (ideas) from story recalled)
Measured: posttest only
Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: ATM Task (Time in Seconds)
Computerized task to simulate use of an ATM machine. Measure: time to complete task (in seconds)
Measured: posttest only
Czaja Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: Prescription Refill Task (Time in Seconds)
Computerized task to simulate use of an automated telephone program to refill prescriptions. Measure: time to complete task (in seconds)
Measured: posttest only
Secondary outcomes (5)
MFQ Memory Complaint (Frequency of Forgetting Scale)
Summative Likert scale measuring frequency of reported memory problems for specific types of problems Measure is average item Likert rating on a 1-7 scale. Higher score indicates fewer memory problems
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
PBMI Specific Memory Self-Efficacy
The Personal Beliefs about Memory Instruments (PBMI) Specific Memory Self-Efficacy measurement is a summative visual analog rating scale measuring self-rated memory aggregated over multiple specific types of memory. Outcomes scaled in average proportion of distance from left (0) to maximum of 1.00 (higher scores indicate greater memory self-efficacy).
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
PBMI Memory Control
Summative visual analog rating scale measuring self-rated control over everyday. Outcome is scaled as average proportion of maximum endorsement (ranging from 0 to 1.0, with higher scores indicate greater perceived control)
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
MCQ Internal Scale
Summative Likert scale obtaining self-rated frequency of use of internal mnemonic strategies in everyday life. Average Likert rating on 1-5 scale (higher scores indicate greater use of strategies)
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
MCQ External
Summative Likert scale obtaining self-rated frequency of use of external memory aids. Outcome is scaled as average Likert rating on 1-5 scale. Higher score indicates greater use of external aids.
Measured: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 Sep 2019
- Study start15 Mar 2021
- Primary completion10 Dec 2021
- Study completion10 Dec 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (14)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for AgingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 68 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Georgia Institute of Technology
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Aging (NIA)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Christopher Hertzog, Ph.D, Principal investigator, Georgia Institute of Technology
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04088136
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H19341
- Other IDs
- 1R21AG059942-01A1
- Acronym
- EMMI
- Status last verified
- Apr 2024
- First submitted
- 11 Sep 2019
- Last updated
- 1 May 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Bailey H, Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Metacognitive training at home: does it improve older adults' learning? Gerontology. 2010;56(4):414-20. doi: 10.1159/000266030. Epub 2009 Dec 11.
PubMed 20016124Bailey HR, Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Does strategy training reduce age-related deficits in working memory? Gerontology. 2014;60(4):346-56. doi: 10.1159/000356699. Epub 2014 Feb 27.
PubMed 24577079Bottiroli S, Cavallini E, Dunlosky J, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. The importance of training strategy adaptation: a learner-oriented approach for improving older adults' memory and transfer. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2013 Sep;19(3):205-18. doi: 10.1037/a0034078. Epub 2013 Aug 26.
PubMed 23978160Bottiroli S, Cavallini E, Dunlosky J, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. Self-guided strategy-adaption training for older adults: Transfer effects to everyday tasks. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2017 Sep;72:91-98. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2017.05.015. Epub 2017 Jun 7.
PubMed 28609674Dunlosky J, Cavallini E, Roth H, McGuire CL, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. Do self-monitoring interventions improve older adult learning? J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007 Jun;62 Spec No 1:70-6. doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.special_issue_1.70.
PubMed 17565167Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Measuring strategy production during associative learning: the relative utility of concurrent versus retrospective reports. Mem Cognit. 2001 Mar;29(2):247-53. doi: 10.3758/bf03194918.
PubMed 11352207Dunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., Kennedy, M. R. T., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). The self-monitoring approach for effective learning. Cognitive Technology, 10, 4-11.
Dunlosky J, Kubat-Silman AK, Hertzog C. Training monitoring skills improves older adults' self-paced associative learning. Psychol Aging. 2003 Jun;18(2):340-5. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.340.
PubMed 12825781Hertzog C, McGuire CL, Horhota M, Jopp D. Does believing in "use it or lose it" relate to self-rated memory control, strategy use, and recall? Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2010;70(1):61-87. doi: 10.2190/AG.70.1.c.
PubMed 20377166Hertzog C, Sinclair SM, Dunlosky J. Age differences in the monitoring of learning: cross-sectional evidence of spared resolution across the adult life span. Dev Psychol. 2010 Jul;46(4):939-48. doi: 10.1037/a0019812.
PubMed 20604613Hertzog C, Dunlosky J. Metacognition in Later Adulthood: Spared Monitoring Can Benefit Older Adults' Self-regulation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2011 Jun;20(3):167-173. doi: 10.1177/0963721411409026.
PubMed 24478539Hertzog C, Lineweaver TT, Hines JC. Computerized assessment of age differences in memory beliefs. Percept Mot Skills. 2014 Oct;119(2):609-28. doi: 10.2466/03.10.PMS.119c23z4. Epub 2014 Sep 26.
PubMed 25259780Hertzog C, Lustig E, Pearman A, Waris A. Behaviors and Strategies Supporting Everyday Memory in Older Adults. Gerontology. 2019;65(4):419-429. doi: 10.1159/000495910. Epub 2019 Feb 8.
PubMed 30739118Lineweaver, T. T., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Adults' efficacy and control beliefs regarding memory and aging: Separating general from personal beliefs. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 5, 264-296. doi: 10.1076/anec.5.4.264.771
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 May 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Enhancing Older Adults' Everyday Memory Function
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04088136
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EMMI / H19341
- Conditions
- Aging
- Keywords
- everyday memory, ecological momentary assessment, memory complaint, metacognition, mnemonics, external aids
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 68 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Georgia Institute of TechnologyUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute on Aging (NIA)
- Study start
- 15 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 10 Dec 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Dec 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 Sep 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 1 May 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Evaluates an intervention designed to improve everyday memory function, contrasting people receiving the intervention with a group that receives traditional memory strategy training.
Detailed description
This project seeks to develop and validate a novel approach to training everyday memory functioning in older adults. The approach (1) trains people to use simple but effective memory skills that have broad applicability in everyday life and (2) shapes a set of skills and habits of mind that will increase the likelihood of effective use of skills and memory aids. It is based on a metacognitive perspective on self-regulation in cognitively demanding situations and informed by recent theories about how suboptimal habit patterns can be altered. The approach has not yet been used in an everyday memory intervention in high-functioning, community-dwelling older adults. The proposed research validates ecological momentary assessment methods to get actual behavioral measures of forgetting in everyday life. It then uses these procedures in a randomized experiment that contrasts the everyday memory intervention group with a traditional memory-strategy training group. The hypothesis is that the everyday memory training intervention will reduce everyday memory errors and memory complaints, whereas the memory strategy training will alter strategy use and memory performance, with little cross-over effect. The hypothesized pattern will establish the explicit benefits of our everyday memory intervention procedures and demonstrate the limitation of standard memory training for that purpose.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Everyday Metacognitive Memory | Experimental | Behavioral: Everyday Metacognitive Memory InterventionTraining in techniques for managing memory demands in everyday life |
| Memory Strategy Control | Active comparator | Behavioral: Memory Strategy Control InterventionTrains the use of memory strategies for learning new associations and concepts |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 70 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 70 - 85 years of age
- in fair to good health
- free of major neurocognitive impairment
- English speaking
- endorsed Smartphone and computer users (or willing to learn)
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- diagnosis of any major neurological problems (e.g. stroke, Parkinson's disease, dementia)
- 1.5 SD below age-normed mean (or lower) on the TICS
- low computer and smart phone literacy
- and poor self-rated health.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Everyday Metacognitive Memory InterventionProvides training in use of techniques and procedures to enhance proactive self-regulatory control over everyday memory demands, including strategies for learning information, planning for meeting everyday goals, and monitoring of efficacy of goal pursuit. | Behavioural | Everyday Metacognitive Memory |
| Memory Strategy Control InterventionTrains use of standard mnemonic techniques such as imagery and sentence generation for learning new associations and organizational and distinctiveness-based strategies for learning sets of items (e.g., word lists). | Behavioural | Memory Strategy Control |
Primary outcome
Everyday Memory Failures
Time frame: minimum 8 day period after training on app prior to posttest
Across the data collection period, participants audio recorded descriptions of their memory failures on a smartphone app. The audio recordings were transcribed and then cleaned and qualitatively coded so that the number of memory failures each participant reported during the data collection period could be counted. The data was qualitatively coded to ensure an accurate count of the number of memory failures per participant without counting duplicate events or accidental reports. Average daily number of reported memory failures from EMA \& daily diaries is reported.
Prospective Memory Lab Contacts
Time frame: Two weeks prior to posttest
Number of successfully completed lab contacts (maximum of 4)
Prospective Memory Lab Contact Efficiency
Time frame: Two weeks prior to posttest
median absolute time deviation (in minutes) from scheduled lab contact for completed contacts
Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: ATM Task (Number of Errors)
Time frame: posttest only
Computerized task to simulate use of an ATM machine. Measure: number of errors
Czaja Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: Prescription Refill Task (Number of Errors)
Time frame: posttest only
Computerized task to simulate use of an automated telephone program to refill prescriptions. Measure: Number of errors
Free Recall Test
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Computerized task to present 30 concrete nouns, 6 from 5 taxonomic categories (Hultsch, Hertzog, Dixon, \& Small, 1998) Measure is proportion of 30 words recalled
Associative Recall Test
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Computerized task to present 40 concrete-concrete associatively unrelated noun pairs (Hertzog, Sinclair, \& Dunlosky, 2010) Outcome is proportion of 40 words correctly recalled.
Story Recall
Time frame: posttest only
gist recall of narrative story (total number of propositions (ideas) from story recalled)
Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: ATM Task (Time in Seconds)
Time frame: posttest only
Computerized task to simulate use of an ATM machine. Measure: time to complete task (in seconds)
Czaja Everyday Cognition Simulation Task: Prescription Refill Task (Time in Seconds)
Time frame: posttest only
Computerized task to simulate use of an automated telephone program to refill prescriptions. Measure: time to complete task (in seconds)
5 secondary outcomes
MFQ Memory Complaint (Frequency of Forgetting Scale)
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
PBMI Specific Memory Self-Efficacy
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
PBMI Memory Control
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
MCQ Internal Scale
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
MCQ External
Time frame: pretest and posttest (approximately 1 month lag)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 May 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 20016124Bailey H, Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Metacognitive training at home: does it improve older adults' learning? Gerontology. 2010;56(4):414-20. doi: 10.1159/000266030. Epub 2009 Dec 11.
- Background: PubMed 24577079Bailey HR, Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Does strategy training reduce age-related deficits in working memory? Gerontology. 2014;60(4):346-56. doi: 10.1159/000356699. Epub 2014 Feb 27.
- Background: PubMed 23978160Bottiroli S, Cavallini E, Dunlosky J, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. The importance of training strategy adaptation: a learner-oriented approach for improving older adults' memory and transfer. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2013 Sep;19(3):205-18. doi: 10.1037/a0034078. Epub 2013 Aug 26.
- Background: PubMed 28609674Bottiroli S, Cavallini E, Dunlosky J, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. Self-guided strategy-adaption training for older adults: Transfer effects to everyday tasks. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2017 Sep;72:91-98. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2017.05.015. Epub 2017 Jun 7.
- Background: PubMed 17565167Dunlosky J, Cavallini E, Roth H, McGuire CL, Vecchi T, Hertzog C. Do self-monitoring interventions improve older adult learning? J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007 Jun;62 Spec No 1:70-6. doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.special_issue_1.70.
- Background: PubMed 11352207Dunlosky J, Hertzog C. Measuring strategy production during associative learning: the relative utility of concurrent versus retrospective reports. Mem Cognit. 2001 Mar;29(2):247-53. doi: 10.3758/bf03194918.
- BackgroundDunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., Kennedy, M. R. T., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). The self-monitoring approach for effective learning. Cognitive Technology, 10, 4-11.
- Background: PubMed 12825781Dunlosky J, Kubat-Silman AK, Hertzog C. Training monitoring skills improves older adults' self-paced associative learning. Psychol Aging. 2003 Jun;18(2):340-5. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.340.
- Background: PubMed 20377166Hertzog C, McGuire CL, Horhota M, Jopp D. Does believing in "use it or lose it" relate to self-rated memory control, strategy use, and recall? Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2010;70(1):61-87. doi: 10.2190/AG.70.1.c.
- Background: PubMed 20604613Hertzog C, Sinclair SM, Dunlosky J. Age differences in the monitoring of learning: cross-sectional evidence of spared resolution across the adult life span. Dev Psychol. 2010 Jul;46(4):939-48. doi: 10.1037/a0019812.
- Background: PubMed 24478539Hertzog C, Dunlosky J. Metacognition in Later Adulthood: Spared Monitoring Can Benefit Older Adults' Self-regulation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2011 Jun;20(3):167-173. doi: 10.1177/0963721411409026.
- Background: PubMed 25259780Hertzog C, Lineweaver TT, Hines JC. Computerized assessment of age differences in memory beliefs. Percept Mot Skills. 2014 Oct;119(2):609-28. doi: 10.2466/03.10.PMS.119c23z4. Epub 2014 Sep 26.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Aging
RecruitingPhase 2
Neuroplasticity Enhancement From Cognitive Training Reinforced by Psilocybin
Alzheimer's Disease
RecruitingObservational study
Amyloid PET Imaging in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
Aging
RecruitingPhase 4
PLLA and CaHA-R for Aesthetic Rejuvenation
Aesthetic
RecruitingObservational study
Genetic and Epigenetic Signatures of Translational Aging Laboratory Testing (GESTALT)
Healthy Volunteers, Non-Healthy/Non-Frail
Recruiting
Exercise for an Aging Liver (EXALIVER)
MASLD - Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease, MASH - Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Christopher Hertzog, Ph.D principal investigator
Georgia Institute of Technology
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Everyday Metacognitive Memory Intervention in people with Aging, run by Georgia Institute of Technology at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 May 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 1 May 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Everyday Memory Failures (time frame: minimum 8 day period after training on app prior to posttest). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04088136, which also lists 14 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 May 2024.