AzTrials
AzTrials

Behavior, HealthNCT05879198

Train Your Brain: A Pilot Project to Improve Memory and Decision Making

A study testing Computer-based Intervention in people with Behavior, Health, run by Henry Ford Health System at 2 sites in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to pilot a computer-based working memory training program to improve delay discounting (DD) and prevent substance use among at-risk adolescents in a traditionally underserved area. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 12 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Behavior, Health
What is being tested?
Computer-based Intervention
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
23 participants
Where
2 sitesUnited States
Study dates
15 Jun 2023to 7 Sep 2023
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 12 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Youth Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Youth must be between the ages of 12 and 14 and have a parent/guardian willing to provide consent for their participation
  2. Youth must be proficient in English in order to validly complete all assessment measures and take part in the computer-based training
  3. Youth must be willing to commit to participate in two to three 20-30-minute computer-based trainings for five to seven weeks
  4. Youth must be willing to take part in assessments before and immediately following the intervention as well as a confidential interview with researchers after completing the computer sessions

Youth Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Currently psychotic
  2. Currently suicidal or evidence active suicidal ideation
  3. Currently diagnosed with a substance use disorder

Parent Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Parent of child participating in intervention and willing to provide consent for themselves and their children to participate
  2. Proficient in English in order to validly complete all assessment measures
  3. Willing to take part in assessments

Parent Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Currently psychotic
  2. Currently suicidal or evidence active suicidal ideation
  3. Currently diagnosed with a substance use disorder

Trial locations and contacts

2 sites in 1 country.

United States2 sites

  • Downtown Boxing Gym

    Detroit, Michigan, 48207

  • Freedom Schools Collaborative

    Flint, Michigan, 48504

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Train Your Brain: A Pilot Project to Improve Memory and Decision Making to Improve Outcomes Among Youth

The goal of this clinical trial is to pilot a computer-based working memory training program to improve delay discounting (DD) and prevent substance use among at-risk adolescents in a traditionally underserved area. Results from the study will inform future efforts substance use prevention efforts targeted at youth exposed to adverse childhood experiences. Findings will also refine future models of intervention delivery in traditionally underserved communities.

The main question[s] it aims to answer are:

  • Determine if the intervention can be delivered feasibly, acceptability, and at sufficient dosage
  • Evaluate the utility of the recruitment and retention procedures as well as identify barriers to participation
Read the detailed description

Youth exposed to early childhood adversity are at increased risk for engaging in problematic substance use, leading to myriad negative health outcomes, including HIV exposure, injury, and impaired driving. Adolescents from low-resource communities evidence elevated rates of exposure to adverse childhood experiences, yet have limited access to evidence-based preventative interventions. Thus, there is a critical need for services that can feasibly target specific mechanisms linking early adversity to the onset and escalation of substance use in traditionally underserved communities.

One such target is delay discounting (DD), the tendency to select small, immediately available rewards at the expense of larger, delayed, rewards. DD has been linked to early substance use initiation and more frequent and severe use across adolescence. Moreover, youth exposed to early childhood adversity evidence more problematic levels of DD, indicating that DD may be a pathway by which early trauma exposure leads to drug and alcohol use.

Iterative pilot trials of approximately 10 youth participants + their parents/guardians will be conducted to examine effectiveness of procedures and initial implementation outcomes.

Research from our team suggests that computer-based interventions targeting proximal cognitive skills, specifically working memory, can improve rates of DD. Moreover, computerized interventions are highly transportable and scalable, making them ideal for dissemination in low-resource communities. The current project proposes to pilot a computer-based working memory (WM) training program to improve DD and prevent substance use among at-risk adolescents in a traditionally underserved area.

Being tested
Computer-based Intervention
Keywords
delay discounting, computer-based intervention, executive functioning, substance use, working memory
Medical subject headings
Health Behavior, Substance-Related Disorders

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Computer-based InterventionBehavioural

    The current project proposes to pilot a computer-based working memory training program to improve delay discounting and prevent substance use among at-risk adolescents in a traditionally underserved area.

Study groups in NCT05879198
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Single-ArmExperimentalAll participants in this phase of the project will receive the active working memory training intervention (15, 20-30-minute computer-based training sessions over the course of 5 to 7 weeks). Additionally, key stakeholders will be asked to participate in a qualitative interview following the intervention to refine future models of intervention delivery in traditionally underserved communities.
Receives: Behavioral: Computer-based Intervention

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Number of Participants With Change in Delay Discounting 5 Trial Adjusted Measure

    This measure asks participants to select between a smaller monetary amount available now and a larger monetary amount available at a delay (i.e., 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, and 25 years). K-values, reflecting the indifference points at which participants preference between smaller and larger rewards, are computed. Because k-values are typically skewed, they are log-transformed before analysis. Scores are not bounded with a minimum and maximum value, but higher scores indicate a preference for smaller-sooner rewards relative to larger rewards available after a delay. Number of participants with change in the Delay Discounting score is defined as participants who evidenced a decrease from baseline scores to post-intervention assessment indicating a greater willingness to wait for larger rewards (which has been associated with healthier outcomes).

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

  2. Change in Consideration of Future Consequences Scale

    The Consideration of Future Consequences Scale1 (CFCS-14) is a 14-item self-report questionnaire that assesses active consideration of longer-term implications of an individual's actions. Lower scores on the CFCS-14 are associated with a greater focus on immediate needs and have been found to be associated with less engagement in health behaviors and greater substance use. Individual items are rated on a scale from 1 to 7; items are summed to create a total scores ranging from 14-98. Change in CFCS-14 score is measured by comparing baseline scores with scores at the post-intervention assessment with higher scores reflecting greater increases in future thinking .

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

  3. Change in Tower of Hanoi

    Tower of Hanoi (TOH) is a measure of planning ahead. It requires the participant to move disks of varying sizes between three pegs in order to create a specified design. Participants are instructed to follow specific rules for play and are awarded points for making each design in the least number of moves. The minimum overall score a participant can get is zero and the maximum score is 72, with higher scores indicating better performance. The current study will use the TOH measure from the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS; Delis, Kaplan \& Kramer, 2001). The test is normed on clinical and community samples of individuals ages 8 to 89 years old and demonstrates adequate reliability and validity (Delis et al. 2004).

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

  4. Change in Letter Number Sequencing

    Letter Number Sequencing (LNS) is a measure of working memory. The participant is read a list of scrambled letters and numbers that they must then repeat back to the examiner in alphabetical and numeric order. The length of the target string increases over time until the participant is no longer able to correctly sequence three letter/ number stems in a row. We will utilize the LNS subscale from the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-5; Wechsler, 2014) for participants between 12 and 16, and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2008) for participants age 17. Higher scores indicate better outcomes with, total raw summed scores ranging from 0 to 30. Both intelligence batteries are widely used and normed on community and clinical populations.

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

  5. Change in Iowa Gambling Task

    Iowa Gambling Task (IGT; Bechara et al., 1994) evaluates experiential decision making. It is administered via a computer interface, in which participants are presented four decks of cards and asked to select one deck to flip a card from in order to win money. Each deck is associated with specific winning and losing probabilities and performance on the task is determined by computing relative preference for longer vs. shorter-term rewards. Advantageous choices are summed and total scores range for -100 to +100 with higher scores indicating a higher proportion of advantageous choices suggesting a better performance.

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

Secondary outcomes (2)

  1. Change in Youth Risk Behavior Survey

    The Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS; CDC, 2001) is a self-report measure of the prevalence of real world risk behaviors, including compromised safety behaviors (e.g. not wearing a seat belt), substance use, risky sexual practices, and delinquent behaviors (e.g. gambling, theft). Because substance use has been associated with problematic behaviors more broadly (Bukstein, 2000), the YRBS will allow us to tap engagement in a variety of related risky behaviors. We looked at changes in a single item assessing on how many of the last 30 days a participant had at least one sip of alcohol. Possible scores ranged from 0 (indicating zero days of drinking in the last 30 days) to 6 (indicating drinking every day over the last 30 days).

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

  2. Change in Alcohol/Marijuana Effect Expectancies

    The Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire (AEQ; Brown, Christiansen, \& Goldman, 1987) and the Marijuana Effect Expectancy Questionnaire (MEEQ; Schafer \& Brown, 1991) are self-report questionnaires that tap youths' perception of positive and negative outcomes related to using alcohol and marijuana. Both measures report on youth positive (AEQ-positive - 4 items; MEEQ-positive - 3 items) and negative (AEQ-negative - 3 items, MEEQ-negative - 3 items) expectations. Each item is ranked on a 5-point Likert scale (1=disagree strongly to 5=agree strongly) and summed. Scores on the AEQ-positive range from 4-20 with higher scores indicating greater positive expectancies, and all other subscale scores ranging from 3-15 with higher scores indicating higher positive (MEEQ-positive) or negative expectancies (AEQ-negative, MEEQ-negative).

    Measured: Baseline, 7 weeks

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted30 May 2023
  2. Study start15 Jun 2023
  3. Primary completion7 Sep 2023
  4. Study completion7 Sep 2023

Resources

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
Prevention
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
23 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05879198
Sponsor's protocol ID
TYBP: 15549-31
Other IDs
R34DA056732-01
Status last verified
Mar 2025
First submitted
18 May 2023
Last updated
28 Mar 2025
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Dube SR, Miller JW, Brown DW, Giles WH, Felitti VJ, Dong M, Anda RF. Adverse childhood experiences and the association with ever using alcohol and initiating alcohol use during adolescence. J Adolesc Health. 2006 Apr;38(4):444.e1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.06.006.

    PubMed 16549308

  • Afuseh E, Pike CA, Oruche UM. Individualized approach to primary prevention of substance use disorder: age-related risks. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2020 Aug 14;15(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s13011-020-00300-7.

    PubMed 32795372

  • Taylor OD. Life stressors and substance abuse in African American adolescents residing in a public housing community. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment. 2015;25(4):288-303.

  • Bolland KA, Bolland JM, Tomek S, Devereaux RS, Mrug S, Wimberly JC. Trajectories of adolescent alcohol use by gender and early initiation status. Youth & Society. 2016;48(1):3-32.

  • Koh HK, Oppenheimer SC, Massin-Short SB, Emmons KM, Geller AC, Viswanath K. Translating research evidence into practice to reduce health disparities: a social determinants approach. Am J Public Health. 2010 Apr 1;100 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S72-80. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.167353. Epub 2010 Feb 10.

    PubMed 20147686

  • Alegria M, Carson NJ, Goncalves M, Keefe K. Disparities in treatment for substance use disorders and co-occurring disorders for ethnic/racial minority youth. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2011 Jan;50(1):22-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.005. Epub 2010 Nov 18.

    PubMed 21156267

  • Griskevicius V, Tybur JM, Delton AW, Robertson TE. The influence of mortality and socioeconomic status on risk and delayed rewards: a life history theory approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011 Jun;100(6):1015-26. doi: 10.1037/a0022403.

    PubMed 21299312

  • Lovallo WR. Early life adversity reduces stress reactivity and enhances impulsive behavior: implications for health behaviors. Int J Psychophysiol. 2013 Oct;90(1):8-16. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.10.006. Epub 2012 Oct 17.

    PubMed 23085387

  • MacKillop J. Integrating behavioral economics and behavioral genetics: delayed reward discounting as an endophenotype for addictive disorders. J Exp Anal Behav. 2013 Jan;99(1):14-31. doi: 10.1002/jeab.4. Epub 2012 Dec 5.

    PubMed 23344986

  • Audrain-McGovern J, Rodriguez D, Epstein LH, Cuevas J, Rodgers K, Wileyto EP. Does delay discounting play an etiological role in smoking or is it a consequence of smoking? Drug Alcohol Depend. 2009 Aug 1;103(3):99-106. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2008.12.019. Epub 2009 May 14.

    PubMed 19443136

  • Felton JW, Collado A, Ingram K, Lejuez CW, Yi R. Changes in delay discounting, substance use, and weight status across adolescence. Health Psychol. 2020 May;39(5):413-420. doi: 10.1037/hea0000833. Epub 2020 Jan 9.

    PubMed 31916829

  • MacKillop J, Amlung MT, Few LR, Ray LA, Sweet LH, Munafo MR. Delayed reward discounting and addictive behavior: a meta-analysis. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011 Aug;216(3):305-21. doi: 10.1007/s00213-011-2229-0. Epub 2011 Mar 4.

    PubMed 21373791

  • Felton JW, Collado A, Ingram KM, Doran K, Yi R. Improvement of Working Memory is a Mechanism for Reductions in Delay Discounting Among Mid-Age Individuals in an Urban Medically Underserved Area. Ann Behav Med. 2019 Oct 7;53(11):988-998. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaz010.

    PubMed 30955043

  • Nelson SE, Van Ryzin MJ, Dishion TJ. Alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco use trajectories from age 12 to 24 years: demographic correlates and young adult substance use problems. Dev Psychopathol. 2015 Feb;27(1):253-77. doi: 10.1017/S0954579414000650. Epub 2014 Jul 14.

    PubMed 25017089

  • Grant BF, Dawson DA. Age of onset of drug use and its association with DSM-IV drug abuse and dependence: results from the National Longitudinal Alcohol Epidemiologic Survey. J Subst Abuse. 1998;10(2):163-73. doi: 10.1016/s0899-3289(99)80131-x.

    PubMed 9854701

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Computer-based Intervention in people with Behavior, Health, run by Henry Ford Health System at 2 sites 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?

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 28 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 2 sites 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 28 Mar 2025). 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?

Number of Participants With Change in Delay Discounting 5 Trial Adjusted Measure (time frame: Baseline, 7 weeks). The study lists 5 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 NCT05879198, which also lists 137 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 28 Mar 2025.

AzTrials uses cookies for analytics and advertising. You can accept or reject them; the site works either way. Privacy Policy.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in