Trial protocol for COLO-DETECT: A randomized controlled trial of lesion detection comparing colonoscopy assisted by the GI Genius™ artificial intelligence endoscopy module with standard colonoscopy.

AIM: Colorectal cancer is the second commonest cause of cancer death worldwide. Colonoscopy plays a key role in the control of colorectal cancer and, in that regard, maximizing detection (and removal) of pre-cancerous adenomas at colonoscopy is imperative. GI Genius™ (Medtronic Ltd) is a computer-aided detection system that integrates with existing endoscopy systems and improves adenoma detection during colonoscopy. COLO-DETECT aims to assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of GI Genius™ in UK routine colonoscopy practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Participants will be recruited from patients attending for colonoscopy at National Health Service sites in England, for clinical symptoms, surveillance or within the national Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Randomization will involve a 1:1 allocation ratio (GI Genius™-assisted colonoscopy:standard colonoscopy) and will be stratified by age category (<60 years, 60-<74 years, ≥74 years), sex, hospital site and indication for colonoscopy. Demographic data, procedural data, histology and post-procedure patient experience and quality of life will be recorded. COLO-DETECT is designed and powered to detect clinically meaningful differences in mean adenomas per procedure and adenoma detection rate between GI Genius™-assisted colonoscopy and standard colonoscopy groups. The study will close when 1828 participants have had a complete colonoscopy. An economic evaluation will be conducted from the perspective of the National Health Service. A patient and public representative is contributing to all stages of the trial. Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04723758) and ISRCTN (10451355). WHAT WILL THIS TRIAL ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: COLO-DETECT will be the first multi-centre randomized controlled trial evaluating GI Genius™ in real world colonoscopy practice and will, uniquely, evaluate both clinical and cost effectiveness.

Evaluating the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the 'strengthening families, strengthening communities' group-based parenting programme: study protocol and initial insights.

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of UK children experience socio-emotional difficulties which can have serious implications for themselves, their families and society. Stark socioeconomic and ethnic inequalities in children's well-being exist. Supporting parents to develop effective parenting skills is an important preventive strategy in reducing inequalities. Parenting interventions have been developed, which aim to reduce the severity and impact of these difficulties. However, most parenting interventions in the UK focus on early childhood (0-10 years) and often fail to engage families from ethnic minority groups and those living in poverty. Strengthening Families, Strengthening Communities (SFSC) is a parenting programme designed by the Race Equality Foundation, which aims to address this gap. Evidence from preliminary studies is encouraging, but no randomised controlled trials have been undertaken so far. METHODS/DESIGN: The TOGETHER study is a multi-centre, waiting list controlled, randomised trial, which aims to test the effectiveness of SFSC in families with children aged 3-18 across seven urban areas in England with ethnically and socially diverse populations. The primary outcome is parental mental well-being (assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale). Secondary outcomes include child socio-emotional well-being, parenting practices, family relationships, self-efficacy, quality of life, and community engagement. Outcomes are assessed at baseline, post intervention, three- and six-months post intervention. Cost effectiveness will be estimated using a cost-utility analysis and cost-consequences analysis. The study is conducted in two stages. Stage 1 comprised a 6-month internal pilot to determine the feasibility of the trial. A set of progression criteria were developed to determine whether the stage 2 main trial should proceed. An embedded process evaluation will assess the fidelity and acceptability of the intervention. DISCUSSION: In this paper we provide details of the study protocol for this trial. We also describe challenges to implementing the protocol and how these were addressed. Once completed, if beneficial effects on both parental and child outcomes are found, the impact, both immediate and longer term, are potentially significant. As the intervention focuses on supporting families living in poverty and those from minority ethnic communities, the intervention should also ultimately have a beneficial impact on reducing health inequalities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered Randomised Controlled Trial ISRCTN15194500 .

BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using Endocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities (the B-ADENOMA Study): a multicentre, randomised controlled flexible sigmoidoscopy trial.

OBJECTIVES: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality marker at lower GI endoscopy. Higher ADRs are associated with lower postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer rates. The English flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening programme (BowelScope), offers a one-off FS to individuals aged 55 years. However, variation in ADR exists. Large studies have demonstrated improved ADR using Endocuff Vision (EV) within colonoscopy screening, but there are no studies within FS. We sought to test the effect of EV on ADR in a national FS screening population. DESIGN: BowelScope: Accuracy of Detection Using ENdocuff Optimisation of Mucosal Abnormalities was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving 16 English BowelScope screening centres. Individuals were randomised to Endocuff Vision-assisted BowelScope (EAB) or Standard BowelScope (SB). ADR, polyp detection rate (PDR), mean adenomas per procedure (MAP), polyp characteristics and location, participant experience, procedural time and adverse events were measured. Comparison of ADR within the trial with national BowelScope ADR was also undertaken. RESULTS: 3222 participants were randomised (53% male) to receive EAB (n=1610) or SB (n=1612). Baseline demographics were comparable between arms. ADR in the EAB arm was 13.3% and that in the SB arm was 12.2% (p=0.353). No statistically significant differences were found in PDR, MAP, polyp characteristics or location, participant experience, complications or procedural characteristics. ADR in the SB control arm was 3.1% higher than the national ADR. CONCLUSION: EV did not improve BowelScope ADR when compared with SB. ADR in both arms was higher than the national ADR. Where detection rates are already high, EV is unable to improve detection further. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT03072472, ISRCTN30005319 and CPMS ID 33224.

Individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation to improve everyday functioning for people with early-stage dementia: A multicentre randomised controlled trial (the GREAT trial).

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether individual goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation (CR) improves everyday functioning for people with mild-to-moderate dementia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Parallel group multicentre single-blind randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing CR added to usual treatment (CR) with usual treatment alone (TAU) for people with an ICD-10 diagnosis of Alzheimer, vascular or mixed dementia, and mild-to-moderate cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score ≥ 18), and with a family member willing to contribute. Participants allocated to CR received 10 weekly sessions over 3 months and four maintenance sessions over 6 months. Participants were followed up 3 and 9 months post randomisation by blinded researchers. The primary outcome was self-reported goal attainment at 3 months. Secondary outcomes at 3 and 9 months included informant-reported goal attainment, quality of life, mood, self-efficacy, and cognition and study partner stress and quality of life. RESULTS: We randomised (1:1) 475 people with dementia; 445 (CR = 281) were included in the intention to treat analysis at 3 months and 426 (CR = 208) at 9 months. At 3 months, there were statistically significant large positive effects for participant-rated goal attainment (d = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.75-1.19), corroborated by informant ratings (d = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.89-1.34). These effects were maintained at 9 months for both participant (d = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17) and informant (d = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73-1.2) ratings. The observed gains related to goals directly targeted in the therapy. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: CR enables people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy.

Goal-orientated cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease-A pilot randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the appropriateness and feasibility of cognitive rehabilitation for people with dementias associated with Parkinson's in a pilot randomised controlled study. METHODS: This was a single-blind pilot randomised controlled trial of goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for dementias associated with Parkinson's. After goal setting, participants were randomised to cognitive rehabilitation (n = 10), relaxation therapy (n = 10), or treatment-as-usual (n = 9). Primary outcomes were ratings of goal attainment and satisfaction with goal attainment. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood, cognition, health status, everyday functioning, and carers' ratings of goal attainment and their own quality of life and stress levels. Assessments were at 2 and 6 months following randomisation. RESULTS: At 2 months, cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment-as-usual and relaxation therapy for the primary outcomes of self-rated goal attainment (d = 1.63 and d = 1.82, respectively) and self-rated satisfaction with goal attainment (d = 2.04 and d = 1.84). At 6 months, cognitive rehabilitation remained superior to treatment-as-usual (d = 1.36) and relaxation therapy (d = 1.77) for self-rated goal attainment. Cognitive rehabilitation was superior to treatment as usual and/or relaxation therapy in a number of secondary outcomes at 2 months (mood, self-efficacy, social domain of quality of life, carers' ratings of participants' goal attainment) and at 6 months (delayed recall, health status, quality of life, carer ratings of participants' goal attainment). Carers receiving cognitive rehabilitation reported better quality of life, health status, and lower stress than those allocated to treatment-as-usual. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is feasible and potentially effective for dementias associated with Parkinson's disease.

Effectiveness of portable electronic and optical magnifiers for near vision activities in low vision: a randomised crossover trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the performance of near vision activities using additional portable electronic vision enhancement systems (p-EVES), to using optical magnifiers alone, by individuals with visual impairment. METHODS: A total of 100 experienced optical aid users were recruited from low vision clinics at Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Manchester, UK, to a prospective two-arm cross-over randomised controlled trial. Reading, performance of near vision activities, and device usage were evaluated at baseline; and at the end of each study arm (Intervention A: existing optical aids plus p-EVES; Intervention B: optical aids only) which was after 2 and 4 months. RESULTS: A total of 82 participants completed the study. Overall, maximum reading speed for high contrast sentences was not statistically significantly different for optical aids and p-EVES, although the critical print size and threshold print size which could be accessed with p-EVES were statistically significantly smaller (p < 0.001 in both cases). The optical aids were used for a larger number of tasks (p < 0.001), and used more frequently (p < 0.001). However p-EVES were preferred for leisure reading by 70% of participants, and allowed longer duration of reading (p < 0.001). During the study arm when they had a p-EVES device, participants were able to carry out more tasks independently (p < 0.001), and reported less difficulty with a range of near vision activities (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study provides evidence that p-EVES devices can play a useful role in supplementing the range of low vision aids used to reduce activity limitation for near vision tasks.

A pilot randomized controlled trial of a self-management group intervention for people with early-stage dementia (The SMART study).

BACKGROUND: Self-management equips people to manage the symptoms and lifestyle changes that occur in long-term health conditions; however, there is limited evidence about its effectiveness for people with early-stage dementia. This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) explored the feasibility of a self-management intervention for people with early-stage dementia. METHODS: The participants were people with early-stage dementia (n = 24) and for each participant a caregiver also took part. Participants were randomly allocated to either an eight-week self-management group intervention or treatment as usual (TAU). Assessments were conducted at baseline, three months and six months post-randomization by a researcher blind to group allocation. The primary outcome measure was self-efficacy score at three months. RESULTS: Thirteen people with dementia were randomized to the intervention and 11 to TAU. Two groups were run, the first consisting of six people with dementia and the second of seven people with dementia. There was a small positive effect on self-efficacy with the intervention group showing gains in self-efficacy compared to the TAU group at three months (d = 0.35), and this was maintained at six months (d = 0.23). In terms of intervention acceptability, attrition was minimal, adherence was good, and satisfaction ratings were high. Feedback from participants was analyzed with content analysis. The findings suggest the positive aspects of the intervention were that it fostered independence and reciprocity, promoted social support, offered information, and provided clinician support. CONCLUSIONS: This study has provided preliminary evidence that self-management may be beneficial for people with early-stage dementia.

A review of sample sizes for UK pilot and feasibility studies on the ISRCTN registry from 2013 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: Pilot and feasibility studies provide information to be used when planning a full trial. A sufficient sample size within the pilot/feasibility study is required so this information can be extracted with suitable precision. This work builds upon previous reviews of pilot and feasibility studies to evaluate whether the target sample size aligns with recent recommendations and whether these targets are being reached. METHODS: A review of the ISRCTN registry was completed using the keywords "pilot" and "feasibility". The inclusion criteria were UK-based randomised interventional trials that started between 2013 (end of the previous review) and 2020. Target sample size, actual sample size and key design characteristics were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to present sample sizes overall and by key characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 761 studies were included in the review of which 448 (59%) were labelled feasibility studies, 244 (32%) pilot studies and 69 (9%) described as both pilot and feasibility studies. Over all included pilot and feasibility studies (n = 761), the median target sample size was 30 (IQR 20-50). This was consistent when split by those labelled as a pilot or feasibility study. Slightly larger sample sizes (median = 33, IQR 20-50) were shown for those labelled both pilot and feasibility (n = 69). Studies with a continuous outcome (n = 592) had a median target sample size of 30 (IQR 20-43) whereas, in line with recommendations, this was larger for those with binary outcomes (median = 50, IQR 25-81, n = 97). There was no descriptive difference in the target sample size based on funder type. In studies where the achieved sample size was available (n = 301), 173 (57%) did not reach their sample size target; however, the median difference between the target and actual sample sizes was small at just minus four participants (IQR -25-0). CONCLUSIONS: Target sample sizes for pilot and feasibility studies have remained constant since the last review in 2013. Most studies in the review satisfy the earlier and more lenient recommendations however do not satisfy the most recent largest recommendation. Additionally, most studies did not reach their target sample size meaning the information collected may not be sufficient to estimate the required parameters for future definitive randomised controlled trials.

Single-centre, single-blinded, randomised, parallel group, feasibility study protocol investigating if mandibular advancement device treatment for obstructive sleep apnoea can reduce nocturnal gastro-oesophageal reflux (MAD-Reflux trial).

INTRODUCTION: Just under half of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) also have gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). These conditions appear to be inter-related and continual positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, the gold standard treatment for OSA to prevent airway collapse, has been shown to reduce GORD. As the impact of mandibular advancement devices, a second-line therapy for OSA, on GORD has yet to be investigated, a feasibility study is needed prior to a definitive trial. METHODS: This will be a single-centre, single-blinded, tertiary-care based, interdisciplinary, parallel randomised controlled study. Potential OSA participants presenting to the sleep department will be pre-screened for GORD using validated questionnaires, consented and invited to receive simultaneous home sleep and oesophageal pH monitoring. Those with confirmed OSA and GORD (n=44) will be randomly allocated to receive either CPAP (n=22) or MAD therapy (n=22). Following successful titration and 3 weeks customisation period, participants will repeat the simultaneous sleep and oesophageal pH monitoring while wearing the device. The number of patients screened for recruitment, drop-out rates, patient feedback of the study protocol, costs of interventions and clinical information to inform a definitive study design will be investigated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Health Research Authority approval has been obtained from the Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, ref:22/EM/0157 and the trial has been registered on ISRCTN (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN16013232). Definitive findings about the feasibility of doing 24 hour pH oesophageal monitoring while doing a home sleep study will be disseminated via clinical and research networks facilitating valuable insights into the simultaneous management of both conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN Reg No: 16013232.

Promoting Activity, Independence, and Stability in Early Dementia and mild cognitive impairment (PrAISED): randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of an exercise and functional activity therapy intervention in adults with early dementia or mild cognitive impairment compared with usual care. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Participants' homes and communities at five sites in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 365 adults with early dementia or mild cognitive impairment who were living at home, and family members or carers. INTERVENTION: The intervention, Promoting activity, Independence, and Stability in Early Dementia and mild cognitive impairment (PrAISED), was a specially designed, dementia specific, rehabilitation programme focusing on strength, balance, physical activity, and performance of activities of daily living, which was tailored and progressive and addressed risk and the psychological needs of people with dementia. Up to 50 therapy sessions were provided over 12 months. The control group received usual care plus a falls risk assessment. Procedures were adapted during the covid-19 pandemic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was score on the carer (informant) reported disability assessment for dementia scale 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported activities of daily living, physical activity, quality of life, balance, functional mobility, fear of falling, frailty, cognition, mood, carer strain, service use at 12 months, and falls between months 4 and 15. RESULTS: 365 patient participants were randomised, 183 to intervention and 182 to control. The median age of participants was 80 years (range 65-95), median Montreal cognitive assessment score was 20 out of 30 (range 13-26), and 58% (n=210) were men. Intervention participants received a median of 31 therapy sessions (interquartile range 22-40) and reported completing a mean 121 minutes of PrAISED exercise each week. Primary outcome data were available for 149 intervention and 141 control participants. Scores on the disability assessment for dementia scale did not differ between groups: adjusted mean difference -1.3, 95% confidence interval -5.2 to 2.6; Cohen's d effect size -0.06, 95% confidence interval -0.26 to 0.15; P=0.51). Upper 95% confidence intervals excluded small to moderate effects on any of the range of outcome measures. Between months 4 and 15 the intervention group experienced 79 falls and the control group 200 falls (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.3; P=0.3). CONCLUSION: The intensive PrAISED programme of exercise and functional activity training did not improve activities of daily living, physical activity, or quality of life; reduce falls; or improve any other secondary health status outcomes, despite good uptake. Future research should consider alternative approaches to maintaining ability and wellbeing in people with dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15320670.

Multiple trials may yield exaggerated effect size estimates.

Published psychological research attempting to support the existence of small and medium effect sizes may not have enough participants to do so accurately, and thus, repeated trials or the use of multiple items may be used in an attempt to obtain significance. Through a series of Monte-Carlo simulations, this article describes the results of multiple trials or items on effect size estimates when the averages and aggregates of a dependent measure are analyzed. The simulations revealed a large increase in observed effect size estimates when the numbers of trials or items in an experiment were increased. Overestimation effects are mitigated by correlations between trials or items, but remain substantial in some cases. Some concepts, such as a P300 wave or a test score, are best defined as a composite of measures. Troubles may arise in more exploratory research where the interrelations among trials or items may not be well described.

Metal pollution as a potential threat to shell strength and survival in marine bivalves.

Marine bivalve molluscs, such as scallops, mussels and oysters, are crucial components of coastal ecosystems, providing a range of ecosystem services, including a quarter of the world's seafood. Unfortunately, coastal marine areas often suffer from high levels of metals due to dumping and disturbance of contaminated material. We established that increased levels of metal pollution (zinc, copper and lead) in sediments near the Isle of Man, resulting from historical mining, strongly correlated with significant weakening of shell strength in king scallops, Pecten maximus. This weakness increased mortality during fishing and left individuals more exposed to predation. Comparative structural analysis revealed that shells from the contaminated area were thinner and exhibited a pronounced mineralisation disruption parallel to the shell surface within the foliated region of both the top and bottom valves. Our data suggest that these disruptions caused reduced fracture strength and hence increased mortality, even at subcritical contamination levels with respect to current international standards. This hitherto unreported effect is important since such non-apical responses rarely feed into environmental quality assessments, despite potentially significant implications for the survival of organisms exposed to contaminants. Hence our findings highlight the impact of metal pollution on shell mineralisation in bivalves and urge a reappraisal of currently accepted critical contamination levels.

Goal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for early-stage Alzheimer's and related dementias: the GREAT RCT.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is an individualised, person-centred intervention for people with mild to moderate dementia that addresses the impact of cognitive impairment on everyday functioning. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether or not CR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention for people with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease or vascular or mixed dementia, and their carers. DESIGN: This multicentre randomised controlled trial compared CR with treatment as usual (TAU). Following a baseline assessment and goal-setting to identify areas of everyday functioning that could be improved or better managed, participants were randomised (1 : 1) via secure web access to an independent randomisation centre to receive either TAU or CR and followed up at 3 and 9 months post randomisation. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: Participants had an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition, diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease or vascular or mixed dementia, had mild to moderate cognitive impairment (Mini Mental State Examination score of ≥ 18 points), were stable on medication if prescribed, and had a family carer who was willing to contribute. The exclusion criteria were people with a history of brain injury or other neurological disorder and an inability to speak English. To achieve adequate power, we needed 350 people to complete the trial, with 175 people in each trial arm. INTERVENTION: Cognitive rehabilitation consisted of 10 therapy sessions over 3 months, followed by four maintenance sessions over 6 months, delivered in participants' homes. The therapists were nine occupational therapists and one nurse. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-reported goal attainment at 3 months. Goal attainment was also assessed at 9 months. Carers provided independent ratings of goal attainment at both time points. The secondary outcomes were participant quality of life, mood, self-efficacy and cognition, and carer stress, health status and quality of life. The assessments at 3 and 9 months were conducted by researchers who were blind to the participants' group allocation. RESULTS: A total of 475 participants were randomised (CR arm, n = 239; TAU arm, n = 236), 427 participants (90%) completed the trial and 426 participants were analysed (CR arm, n = 208, TAU arm, n = 218). At 3 months, there were statistically significant large positive effects for participant-rated goal attainment [mean change in the CR arm: 2.57; mean change in the TAU arm: 0.86; Cohen'sd = 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 1.19], corroborated by carer ratings (Cohen'sd = 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.34). These effects were maintained at 9 months for both the participant ratings (Cohen's d = 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.17) and the carer ratings (Cohen's d = 0.96, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.20). There were no significant differences in the secondary outcomes. In the cost-utility analyses, there was no evidence of cost-effectiveness in terms of gains in the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the person with dementia (measured using the DEMentia Quality Of Life questionnaire utility score) or the QALYs of the carer (measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version) from either cost perspective. In the cost-effectiveness analyses, by reference to the primary outcome of participant-rated goal attainment, CR was cost-effective from both the health and social care perspective and the societal perspective at willingness-to-pay values of £2500 and above for improvement in the goal attainment measure. There was no evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the self-efficacy measure (the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale) from either cost perspective. LIMITATIONS: Possible limitations arose from the non-feasibility of using observational outcome measures, the lack of a general measure of functional ability and the exclusion of people without a carer or with rarer forms of dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is clinically effective in enabling people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy sessions. FUTURE WORK: Next steps will focus on the implementation of CR into NHS and social care services and on extending the approach to people with rarer forms of dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21027481. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is a personalised intervention to help people with early-stage dementia to manage everyday activities. This individualised therapy is conducted in people's own homes over several sessions. A therapist works with the person and the carer to identify realistic and relevant goals, plan how to tackle these and support people in achieving them. Previous small studies suggested that CR could be beneficial. METHODS: The Goal-oriented cognitive Rehabilitation in Early-stage Alzheimer's and related dementias: multicentre single-blind randomised controlled Trial (GREAT) was run in eight centres to find out whether or not CR improves everyday functioning. Participants were in the early stages of having Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia or mixed dementia, with a family carer involved. At the first assessment, participants identified areas in which they would like to see improvements, and set goals. Participants and carers rated how well participants were currently doing in relation to these goals and completed questionnaires, for example about mood and quality of life. Participants were then randomly selected to either receive CR or continue with treatment as usual (TAU). CR consisted of 10 weekly sessions with the therapist over 3 months, followed by four sessions over the next 6 months. Participants were reassessed after 3 and 9 months. RESULTS: We included 475 participants, and 427 participants (90%) completed the trial (209 participants in the CR arm and 218 participants in the TAU arm). After 3 months, the ratings by both participants and carers in the CR group showed that participants were doing significantly better in relation to their goals, and this was maintained 6 months later. Ratings for the TAU-arm participants did not improve significantly. There were no other differences between the groups. There was a strong economic case for CR. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive rehabilitation is effective in enabling people with early-stage dementia to improve their everyday functioning in relation to individual goals targeted in the therapy sessions. Next steps will focus on the implementation of CR into NHS and social care services.

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.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia progressively lose cognitive and functional abilities. Interventions promoting exercise and activity may slow decline. We developed a novel intervention to promote activity and independence and prevent falls in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early dementia. We successfully undertook a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) to refine the intervention and research delivery. We are now delivering a multi-centred RCT to evaluate its clinical and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: We will recruit 368 people with MCI or early dementia (Montreal Cognitive Assessment score 13-25) and a family member or carer from memory assessment clinics, other community health or social care venues or an online register (the National Institute for Health Research Join Dementia Research). Participants will be randomised to an individually tailored activity and exercise programme delivered using motivational theory to promote adherence and continued engagement, with up to 50 supervised sessions over one year, or a brief falls prevention assessment (control). The intervention will be delivered in participants' homes by trained physiotherapists, occupational therapists and therapy assistants. We will measure disabilities in activities of daily living, physical activity, balance, cognition, mood, quality of life, falls, carer strain and healthcare and social care use. We will use a mixed methods approach to conduct a process evaluation to assess staff training and delivery of the intervention, and to identify individual- and context-level mechanisms affecting intervention engagement and activity maintenance. We will undertake a health economic evaluation to determine if the intervention is cost-effective. DISCUSSION: We describe the protocol for a multi-centre RCT that will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a therapy programme designed to promote activity and independence amongst people living with dementia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN15320670. Registered on 4 September 2018.

Accuracy of effect size estimates from published psychological research.

A Monte-Carlo simulation was used to model the biasing of effect sizes in published studies. The findings from the simulation indicate that, when a predominant bias to publish studies with statistically significant results is coupled with inadequate statistical power, there will be an overestimation of effect sizes. The consequences such an effect size overestimation will then have on meta-analyses and power analyses are highlighted and discussed along with measures which can be taken to reduce the problem.

A development study and randomised feasibility trial of a tailored intervention to improve activity and reduce falls in older adults with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia progressively lose abilities and are prone to falling. Exercise- and activity-based interventions hold the prospect of increasing abilities, reducing falls, and slowing decline in cognition. Current falls prevention approaches are poorly suited to people with dementia, however, and are of uncertain effectiveness. We used multiple sources, and a co-production approach, to develop a new intervention, which we will evaluate in a feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT), with embedded adherence, process and economic analyses. METHODS: We will recruit people with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia from memory assessment clinics, and a family member or carer. We will randomise participants between a therapy programme with high intensity supervision over 12 months, a therapy programme with moderate intensity supervision over 3 months, and brief falls assessment and advice as a control intervention. The therapy programmes will be delivered at home by mental health specialist therapists and therapy assistants. We will measure activities of daily living, falls and a battery of intermediate and distal health status outcomes, including activity, balance, cognition, mood and quality of life. The main aim is to test recruitment and retention, intervention delivery, data collection and other trial processes in advance of a planned definitive RCT. We will also study motivation and adherence, and conduct a process evaluation to help understand why results occurred using mixed methods, including a qualitative interview study and scales measuring psychological, motivation and communication variables. We will undertake an economic study, including modelling of future impact and cost to end-of-life, and a social return on investment analysis. DISCUSSION: In this study, we aim to better understand the practicalities of both intervention and research delivery, and to generate substantial new knowledge on motivation, adherence and the approach to economic analysis. This will enable us to refine a novel intervention to promote activity and safety after a diagnosis of dementia, which will be evaluated in a definitive randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02874300; ISRCTN 10550694.

Out with .05, in with Replication and Measurement: Isolating and Working with the Particular Effect Sizes that are Troublesome for Inferential Statistics.

It is difficult to obtain adequate power to test a small effect size with a set criterion alpha of 0.05. Probably an inferential test will indicate non-statistical significance and not be published. Rarely, statistical significance will be obtained, and an exaggerated effect size calculated and reported. Accepting all inferential probabilities and associated effect sizes could solve exaggeration problems. Graphs, generated through Monte Carlo methods, are presented to illustrate this. The first graph presents effect sizes (Cohen's d) as lines from 1 to 0 with probabilities on the Y axis and the number of measures on the X axis. This graph shows effect sizes of .5 or less should yield non-significance with sample sizes below 120 measures. The other graphs show results with as many as 10 small sample size replications. There is a convergence of means with the effect size as sample size increases and measurement accuracy emerges.

Portable electronic vision enhancement systems in comparison with optical magnifiers for near vision activities: an economic evaluation alongside a randomized crossover trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of portable electronic vision enhancement system (p-EVES) devices compared with optical low vision aids (LVAs), for improving near vision visual function, quality of life and well-being of people with a visual impairment. METHODS: An AB/BA randomized crossover trial design was used. Eighty-two participants completed the study. Participants were current users of optical LVAs who had not tried a p-EVES device before and had a stable visual impairment. The trial intervention was the addition of a p-EVES device to the participant's existing optical LVA(s) for 2 months, and the control intervention was optical LVA use only, for 2 months. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were conducted from a societal perspective. RESULTS: The mean cost of the p-EVES intervention was £448. Carer costs were £30 (4.46 hr) less for the p-EVES intervention compared with the LVA only control. The mean difference in total costs was £417. Bootstrapping gave an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £736 (95% CI £481 to £1525) for a 7% improvement in near vision visual function. Cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ranged from £56 991 (lower 95% CI = £19 801) to £66 490 (lower 95% CI = £23 055). Sensitivity analysis varying the commercial price of the p-EVES device reduced ICERs by up to 75%, with cost per QALYs falling below £30 000. CONCLUSION: Portable electronic vision enhancement system (p-EVES) devices are likely to be a cost-effective use of healthcare resources for improving near vision visual function, but this does not translate into cost-effective improvements in quality of life, capability or well-being.

Accuracy when inferential statistics are used as measurement tools.

BACKGROUND: Inferential statistical tests that approximate measurement are called acceptance procedures. The procedure includes type 1 error, falsely rejecting the null hypothesis, and type 2 error, failing to reject the null hypothesis when the alternative should be supported. This approach involves repeated sampling from a distribution with established parameters such that the probabilities of these errors can be ascertained. With low error probabilities the procedure has the potential to approximate measurement. How close this procedure approximates measurement was examined. FINDINGS: A Monte Carlo procedure set the type 1 error at p = 0.05 and the type 2 error at either p = 0.20 or p = 0.10 for effect size values of d = 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8. The resultant values are approximately 15 and 6.25% larger than the effect sizes entered into the analysis depending on a type 2 error rate of p < 0.20, or p < 0.10 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Acceptance procedures approximate values wherein a decision could be made. In a health district a deviation at a particular level could signal a change in health. The approximations could be reasonable in some circumstances, but if more accurate measures are desired a deviation could be reduced by the percentage appropriate for the power. The tradeoff for such a procedure is an increase in type 1 error rate and a decrease in type 2 errors.

The Precision of Effect Size Estimation From Published Psychological Research: Surveying Confidence Intervals.

Confidence interval ( CI) widths were calculated for reported Cohen's d standardized effect sizes and examined in two automated surveys of published psychological literature. The first survey reviewed 1,902 articles from Psychological Science. The second survey reviewed a total of 5,169 articles from across the following four APA journals: Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, and Developmental Psychology. The median CI width for d was greater than 1 in both surveys. Hence, CI widths were, as Cohen (1994) speculated, embarrassingly large. Additional exploratory analyses revealed that CI widths varied across psychological research areas and that CI widths were not discernably decreasing over time. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed along with ways of reducing the CI widths and thus improving precision of effect size estimation.