Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation of BetterBrains: A Person-Centered Online Intervention to Delay Cognitive Decline in Adults at Risk of Dementia
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online December 6, 2022
Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation of BetterBrains: A Person-Centered Online Intervention to Delay Cognitive Decline in Adults at Risk of Dementia
The BetterBrains Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) will evaluate the effectiveness of an online, person-centered, risk factor management, coaching intervention in community-dwelling, healthy adults at risk of cognitive decline. Multi-component interventions are challenging to evaluate due to program complexity and personalization to individual needs and contexts. This paper describes a multi-level process evaluation conducted alongside the BetterBrains RCT.
Objective:
To understand how and why the BetterBrains intervention was effective or ineffective at reducing cognitive decline in healthy adults whilst considering the context in which it was implemented.
Methods:
1,510 non cognitively-deteriorated community-dwelling adults aged 40–70 years old at risk of cognitive decline will be recruited and randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. All BetterBrains intervention participants, coaches, and the research team will be included in the evaluation. A mixed-methods design will be used, guided by The Framework for Implementation Fidelity and the program logic model. Data will be sourced from interviews, focus groups, surveys, BetterBrains coach notes, participant weekly check-in surveys, and audio recordings of intervention coaching sessions. Quantitative data will be analyzed via descriptive and inferential statistics and qualitative data will be analyzed using content and thematic analysis.
Results:
The process evaluation will provide information about contextual and influencing factors related to the implementation of BetterBrains and the RCT outcomes.
Conclusion:
Understanding how BetterBrains was implemented and its associated impacts will inform the translation of the program into community and clinical settings, providing easy access to online, personalized dementia prevention services.
NganduT, LehtisaloJ, SolomonA, LevalahtiE, AhtiluotoS, AntikainenR, BäckmanL, HänninenT, JulaA, LaatikainenT, LindströmJ, MangialascheF, PaajanenT, PajalaS, PeltonenM, RauramaaR, Stigsdotter-NeelyA, StrandbergT, TuomilehtoJ, SoininenH, KivipeltoM (2015) A 2 year multidomain intervention of diet, exercise, cognitive training, and vascular risk monitoring versus control to prevent cognitive decline in at-risk elderly people (FINGER): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet385, 2255–2263.
10.
HeffernanM, AndrewsG, Fiatarone SinghMA, ValenzuelaM, AnsteyKJ, MaederAJ, McNeilJ, JormL, LautenschlagerNT, SachdevPS, GinigeJA, HobbsMJ, BoulamatsisC, ChauT, CobiacL, CoxKL, DanielK, FloodVM, GuerreroY, GunnJ, JainN, KochanNA, LampitA, MavrosY, MeiklejohnJ, NobleY, O’LearyF, Radd-VagenasS, WaltonCC (2019) Maintain Your Brain: Protocol of a 3-year randomized controlled trial of a personalized multi-modal digital health intervention to prevent cognitive decline among community dwelling 55 to 77 year olds. J Alzheimers Dis70, S221–S37.
11.
BajwaRK, GoldbergSE, Van der WardtV, BurgonC, Di LoritoC, GodfreyM, DunlopM, LoganP, MasudT, GladmanJ, SmithH, Hood-MooreV, BoothV, Das NairR, PollockK, VedharaK, EdwardsRT, JonesC, HoareZ, BrandA, HarwoodRH (2019) A randomised controlled trial of an exercise intervention promoting activity, independence and stability in older adults with mild cognitive impairment and early dementia (PrAISED) - A Protocol. Trials20, 815.
12.
JohnJR, TannousWK, JonesA (2020) Outcomes of a 12-month patient-centred medical home model in improving patient activation and self-management behaviours among primary care patients presenting with chronic diseases in Sydney, Australia: A before-and-after study. BMC Family Practice21, 158.
13.
MooreGF, AudreyS, BarkerM, BondL, BonellC, HardemanW, MooreL, O’CathainA, TinatiT, WightD, BairdJ (2015) Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ350, h1258.
14.
PéerezD, Van der StuyftP, ZabalaMC, CastroM, LefèvreP (2016) A modified theoretical framework to assess implementation fidelity of adaptive public health interventions. Implement Sci11, 91.
15.
LimYY, AytonD, PerinS, LavaleA, YassiN, BuckleyR, BartonC, BrunsL, MorelloR, PirottaS, RosenichE, RajaratnamSMW, SinnottR, BrodtmannA, BushAI, MaruffP, ChurilovL, BarkerA, PaseMP (2021) An online, person-centered, risk factor management program to prevent cognitive decline: Protocol for a prospective behavior-modification blinded endpoint randomized controlled trial. J Alzheimers Dis83, 1603–1622.
16.
BakerJE, BrunsLJr, HassenstabJ, MastersCL, MaruffP, LimYY (2020) Use of an experimental language acquisition paradigm for standardized neuropsychological assessment of learning: A pilot study in young and older adults. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol42, 55–65.
17.
MackinRS, InselPS, TruranD, FinleyS, FlennikenD, NoshenyR, UlbrightA, ComachoM, BickfordD, HarelB, MaruffP, WeinerMW (2018) Unsupervised online neuropsychological test performance for individuals with mild cognitive impairment and dementia: Results from the Brain Health Registry. Alzheimers Dementia10, 573–582.
18.
PerinS, BuckleyRF, PaseMP, YassiN, LavaleA, WilsonPH, SchembriA, MaruffP, LimYY (2020) Unsupervised assessment of cognition in the Healthy Brain Project: Implications for web-based registries of individuals at risk for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement6, e12043.
19.
LimYY, BakerJE, BrunsL, Jr., MillsA, FowlerC, FrippJ, Rainey-SmithSR, AmesD, MastersCL, MaruffP (2020) Association of deficits in short-term learning and Aβ and hippocampal volume in cognitively normal adults. Neurology95, e2577–e2585.
20.
LimYY, PietrzakRH, BourgeatP, AmesD, EllisKA, RembachA, HarringtonK, SalvadoO, MartinsRN, SnyderPJ, MastersCL, RoweCC, VillemagneVL, MaruffP (2015) Relationships between performance on the Cogstate Brief Battery, neurodegeneration, and Aβ accumulation in cognitively normal older adults and adults with MCI. Arch Clin Neuropsychol30, 49–58.
21.
HaysRD, MoralesLS (2001) The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Ann Med33, 350–357.
22.
KimS, Sargent-CoxK, CherbuinN, AnsteyKJ (2014) Development of the motivation to change lifestyle and health behaviours for dementia risk reduction scale. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra4, 172–183.
23.
OsborneRH, BatterhamRW, ElsworthGR, HawkinsM, BuchbinderR (2013) The grounded psychometric development and initial validation of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). BMC Public Health13, 658.
24.
SundellK, BeelmannA, HassonH, von Thiele SchwarzU (2016) Novel programs, international adoptions, or contextual adaptations? Meta-analytical results from German and Swedish intervention research. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol45, 784–796.
25.
PrathivadiP, BuckinghamP, ChakrabortyS, HawesL, SahaSK, BartonC, MazzaD, RussellG, SturgissE (2021) Implementation science: An introduction for primary care. Fam Pract39, 219–221.
26.
HernandezM, HodgesS (2003) Building upon the theory of change for systems of care. J Emot Behav Disord11, 19–26.
27.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2016) The Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) Remoteness Structure, Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics. https://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/home/remoteness+structure, Last updated December 14, 2021, Accessed on October 6, 2022.
28.
MorrisRL, HillKD, AckermanIN, AytonD, ArendtsG, BrandC, CameronP, Etherton-BeerCD, FlickerL, HillAM, HunterP, LowthianJA, MorelloR, NymanSR, RedfernJ, SmitV, BarkerAL (2019) A mixed methods process evaluation of a person-centred falls prevention program. BMC Health Serv Res19, 906.
29.
O’CathainA, MurphyE, NichollJ (2008) The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research. J Health Serv Res Policy13, 92–98.
30.
CreswellJW, Plano ClarkVL (2011) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
31.
ShieldsCG, FranksP, FiscellaK, MeldrumS, EpsteinRM (2005) Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD): Reliability and validity. Ann Fam Med3, 436–442.
32.
WilkinsonS (1998) Focus group methodology: A review. Int J Soc Res Methodol1, 181–203.
GuestG, NameyE, McKennaK (2017) How many focus groups are enough? Building an evidence base for nonprobability sample sizes. Field Methods29, 3–22.
35.
NowellLS, NorrisJM, WhiteDE, MoulesNJ (2017) Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods16, doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847.
36.
TongA, SainsburyP, CraigJ (2007) Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups . . Int J Qual Health Care19, 349–357.
37.
RavishankarN, MujjaA, LewisMG, Sreekumaran NairN (2014) A tool to measure complexity in public health interventions. Clin Epidemiol Glob Health2, 80–86.
38.
BarkerA, CameronP, FlickerL, ArendtsG, BrandC, Etherton-BeerC, ForbesA, HainesT, HillAM, HunterP, LowthianJ, NymanSR, RedfernJ, SmitV, WaldronN, BoyleE, MacDonaldE, AytonD, MorelloR, HillK (2019) Evaluation of RESPOND, a patient-centred program to prevent falls in older people presenting to the emergency department with a fall: A randomised controlled trial. PLoS Med16, e1002807.
39.
SuppleeLH, ParekhJ, JohnsonM (2018) Principles of precision prevention science for improving recruitment and retention of participants. Prev Sci19, 689–694.
