Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:57:56.580Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Jog Your Mind: methodology and challenges of conducting evaluative research in partnership with community organizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2014

Nathalie Bier ,
Agathe Lorthios-Guilledroit ,
Kareen Nour ,
Manon Parisien ,
Dave Ellemberg  and
Sophie Laforest
Nathalie Bier
Affiliation:
School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada Research Centre of the Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec H3W 1W5, Canada
Agathe Lorthios-Guilledroit
Affiliation:
Research Centre of the Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec H3W 1W5, Canada
Kareen Nour
Affiliation:
Direction de santé publique de la Montérégie, Longueuil, Quebec J4K 2M3, Canada
Manon Parisien
Affiliation:
Centre for Research and Expertise in Social Gerontology (CREGÉS), CSSS Cavendish-Centre affilié universitaire, Côte St-Luc, Quebec H4W 2T5, Canada
Dave Ellemberg
Affiliation:
Department of Kinesiology, Université de Montréal, Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada
Sophie Laforest*
Affiliation:
Centre for Research and Expertise in Social Gerontology (CREGÉS), CSSS Cavendish-Centre affilié universitaire, Côte St-Luc, Quebec H4W 2T5, Canada Department of Kinesiology, Université de Montréal, Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Sophie Laforest, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Kinesiology, Université de Montréal, 2100 Édouard-Montpetit, Suite 8202, P.O. Box 6128, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3J7, Canada. Phone: +514-343-5632; Fax: +514-343-2181. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Jog Your Mind is a community-based program aiming at empowering elderly people to maintain their cognitive abilities using a multi-strategic approach including cognitively stimulating activities, mnemonic strategies, and strategies to promote healthy behaviors. It is offered to elderly individuals without known or diagnosed cognitive impairment by volunteers or community practitioners over ten weekly sessions. This paper describes the protocol of a quasi-experimental study designed to evaluate Jog Your Mind.

Methods:

Community responsible to recruit participants were either assigned to the experimental group (participating in the Jog Your Mind program) or to the control group (one-year waiting list). All participants were interviewed at baseline (T1), after the program (T2), and 12 months after the baseline (T3). Primary outcomes were the use of everyday memory strategies and aids and subjective memory functioning in daily life. Secondary outcomes included attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors related to cognitive vitality and cognitive abilities (memory and executive functions). Program delivery, organizational and environmental variables were recorded to document the implementation process.

Results:

Twenty-three community organizations recruited 294 community-dwelling elderly individuals in total at T1. Between T1 and T3, an attrition rate of 15.2% was obtained.

Conclusions:

Jog Your Mind is one of the only programs targeting cognition among older adults being offered in community settings by community practitioners. The protocol described was designed with a focus on maximizing broad generalizations of the results while achieving scientific rigor. It can serve as an example to guide future research aiming to evaluate health interventions under natural conditions.

Keywords

cognitive traininghealth agingmemoryneuropsychological testingresearch design and methodology
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 79 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allison, K. R. and Rootman, I. (1996). Scientific rigor and community participation in health promotion research: are they compatible? Health Promotion International, 11, 333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonell, C. P. et al. (2011). Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public health interventions: design challenges and solutions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 65, 582–587.Google Scholar
Clement, J. P., Nassif, R. F., Leger, J. M. and Marchand, F. (1997). Mise au point et contribution à la validation d’une version française brève de la Geriatric Depression Scale de Yesavage. Encéphale, 23, 91–99.Google Scholar
Colcombe, S. and Kramer, A. F. (2003). Fitness effects on the cognitive function of older adults: a meta-analytic study. Psychological Science, 14, 125–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Contandriopoulos, A. P., Champagne, F., Denis, J. F. and Avargues, M. C. (2000). L’évaluation dans le domaine de la santé: concepts et méthodes. Revue d’Épidemiologie et de Santé Publique, 48, 517–530.Google Scholar
Coyette, F., Arno, P., Leclercq, M., Seron, X., Van der Linden, M. and Grégoire, J. (1999). Questionnaire d’auto-évaluation de l’attention (Q.A.A.): Élaboration de normes a partir d’une population de 220 sujets adultes. Geneva, Switzerland: Université de Genève. Available at: http://www.unige.ch/fapse/psychoclinique/UPNC/publications/outils.html; last accessed 7 August 2013.Google Scholar
Craik, F. I. M. et al. (2007). Cognitive rehabilitation in the elderly: effects on memory. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 132–142.Google Scholar
Daveluy, C., Audet, N., Courtemanche, R., Lapointe, F., Côté, L. and Baulne, J. (2000). Méthodes. Québec, Canada: Institut de la statistique du Québec.Google Scholar
Daveluy, C., Pica, L., Audet, N., Courtemanche, R., Lapointe, F. and Côté, L. (2001). Enquête sociale et de santé 1998 – Cahier technique et méthodologique: documentation générale (volume 1). Québec, Canada: Institut de la statistique du Québec.Google Scholar
Davis, L. L., Broome, M. E. and Cox, R. P. (2002). Maximizing retention in community-based clinical trials. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 34, 47–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E. and Ober, B. A. (1987). California Verbal Learning Test. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E. and Ober, B. A. (2000). California Verbal Learning Test, 2nd edn. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
Dellefield, K. S. and McDougall, G. J. (1996). Increasing metamemory in older adults. Nursing Research, 45, 284–290.Google Scholar
Des Jarlais, D. C., Lyles, C., Crepaz, N. and the TREND Group (2004). Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 361–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. A., Hultsch, D. F. and Hertzog, C. (1988). The Metamemory in Adulthood (MIA) Questionnaire. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 24, 671–688.Google ScholarPubMed
Fienieg, B., Nierkens, V., Tonkens, E., Plochg, T. and Stronks, K. (2012). Why play an active role? A qualitative examination of lay citizens’ main motives for participation in health promotion. Health Promotion International, 27, 416–426.Google Scholar
Filiatrault, J. et al. (2007). Implementing a community-based falls-prevention program: from drawing board to reality. Canadian Journal on Aging, 26, 213–225.Google Scholar
Fillit, H. M. et al. (2002). Achieving and maintaining cognitive vitality with aging. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 77, 681–696.Google Scholar
Fort, I., Adoul, L., Holl, D., Kaddour, J. and Gana, K. (2004). Psychometric properties of the French version of the Multifactorial Memory Questionnaire for adults and the elderly. Canadian Journal on Aging, 23, 347–357.Google Scholar
Glasgow, R. E., Lichtenstein, E. and Marcus, A. C. (2003). Why don't we see more translation of health promotion research to practice? Rethinking the efficacy-to-effectiveness transition. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1261–1267.Google Scholar
Golden, C. J. (1978). Stroop Color and Word Test: A Manual for Clinical and Experimental Uses. Chicago, IL: Skoelting Co.Google Scholar
Gul, R. B. and Ali, P. A. (2010). Clinical trials: the challenge of recruitment and retention of participants. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19, 227–233.Google Scholar
Hayslip, B., Maloy, R. M. and Kohl, R. (1995). Long-term efficacy of fluid ability interventions with older adults. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50, 141–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hendrie, H. C., et al. (2006). The NIH Cognitive and Emotional Health Project. Report of the Critical Evaluation Study Committee. Alzheimer's and Dementia, 2, 12–32.Google Scholar
Hultsch, D. F., Hertzog, C. and Dixon, R. A. (1987). Age differences in metamemory: resolving the inconsistencies. Canandian Journal of Psychology, 41, 193–208.Google Scholar
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A. and Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173–202.Google Scholar
Kaplan, S. A. and Garrett, K. E. (2005). The use of logic models by community-based initiatives. Evaluation and Program Planning, 28, 167–172.Google Scholar
Karp, A., Paillard-Borg, S., Wang, H. X., Silverstein, M., Winblad, B. and Fratiglioni, L. (2006). Mental, physical and social components in leisure activities equally contribute to decrease dementia risk. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 21, 65–73.Google Scholar
Kazis, L. E., Anderson, J. J. and Meenan, R. F. (1989). Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Medical Care, 27, S178–S189.Google Scholar
Lezak, M. D. (1995). Neuropsychological Assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, M., Clare, L., Altgassen, A. M., Cameron, M. H. and Zehnder, F. (2011). Cognition-based interventions for healthy older people and people with mild cognitive impairment. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 19, CD006220.Google Scholar
Nasreddine, Z. S., Chertkow, H., Phillips, N., Whitehead, V., Collin, I. and Cummings, J. L. (2004). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): a brief cognitive screening tool for detection of mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695–699.Google Scholar
Nour, K. et al. (2010). Développer un programme communautaire de promotion de la vitalité cognitive chez les aînés. Avantages et défis d’une synergie recherche-pratique. Presented at the 39th Annual Scientific and Educative Meeting of the Canadian Association of Gerontology, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Parisi, J. M., Greene, J. C., Morrow, D. G. and Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (2007). Senior odyssey: participant experiences of a program of social and intellectual engagement. Activities, Adaptation and Aging, 31, 31–49.Google Scholar
Parisien, M., Gilbert, N., Amzallag, M., Guay, D., Nour, K. and Laforest, S. (2013a). Jog Your Mind! A Program of Cognitive Vitality for Seniors. Côte-St-Luc, QC: CSSS Cavendish.Google Scholar
Parisien, M., Gilbert, N., Amzallag, M., Guay, D., Nour, K. and Laforest, S. (2013b). Musclez vos méninges. Atelier de vitalité intellectuelle pour aînés. Côte-St-Luc, QC: CSSS Cavendish.Google Scholar
Popov, P. et al. (2010). Jog Your Mind: a community program for intellecutal vitality. Pluriâges, 1, 10–11.Google Scholar
Rebok, G. W., Carlson, M. C. and Langbaurn, J. B. S. (2007). Training and maintaining memory abilities in healthy older adults: traditional and novel approaches. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 62, 53–61.Google Scholar
Robitaille, Y. et al. (2005). Moving forward in fall prevention: an intervention to improve balance among older adults in real-world settings. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 2049–2056.Google Scholar
Rothman, K. J. (1990). No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology, 1, 43–46.Google Scholar
Santé Québec (1998). Questionnaire sur les habitudes de vie et de la santé 1998 (ESS98/QAA.1 Janvier 1998). Montreal, Canada: Santé Québec and Groupe Léger & Léger Inc. Available at: http://www.bdso.gouv.qc.ca/docs-ken/multimedia/Enq98_QAA.pdf, last accessed 7 August 2013.Google Scholar
Schinka, J. A., McBride, A., Vanderploeg, R. D., Tennyson, K., Borenstein, A. R. and Mortimer, J. A. (2005). Florida cognitive activities scale: initial development and validation. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 11, 108–116.Google Scholar
Small, G. W. et al. (2006). Effects of a 14-day healthy longevity lifestyle program on cognition and brain function. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 14, 538–545.Google Scholar
Statistique Canada (2005). Enquête sur la santé dans les collectivités canadiennes 2005. Ottawa, Canada: Statistique Canada. Available at: http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/instrument/3226_Q1_V3-fra.pdf, last accessed 7 August 2013.Google Scholar
Stewart, A. L., Mills, K. M., King, A. C., Haskell, W. L., Gillis, D. and Ritter, P. L. (2001). CHAMPS physical activity questionnaire for older adults: outcomes for interventions. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33, 1126–1141.Google Scholar
Straw, R. B. and Herrell, J. M. (2002). A framework for understanding and improving multisite evaluations. New directions for evaluation, 94, 5–15.Google Scholar
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.Google Scholar
Tardif, S. and Simard, M. (2011). Cognitive stimulation programs in healthy elderly: a review. International Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 2011, 378934.Google Scholar
Troyer, A. K. (2001). Improving memory knowledge, satisfaction, and functioning via an education and intervention program for older adults. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 8, 256–268.Google Scholar
Troyer, A. K. and Rich, J. B. (2002). Psychometric properties of a new metamemory questionnaire for older adults. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57, 19–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vannier, M. and Lemyse, C. (1994). Le Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test (version française). Montreal, QC: Centre de recherche Institut de réadaptation de Montréal.Google Scholar
Willis, S. L. et al. (2006). Long-term effects of cognitive training on everyday functional outcomes in older adults. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296, 2805–2814.Google Scholar
Wilson, B., Cockburn, J. and A., B. (1994). Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test. Bury St Edminds, England: Thames Valley Test Company.Google Scholar
Winocur, G. et al. (2007). Cognitive rehabilitation in the elderly: an evaluation of psychosocial factors. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 153–165.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Bier Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Bier Supplementary Material(File)
File 82.3 KB