BACKGROUND: In the domain of Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention, various potentially protective factors have been identified in epidemiological studies. Although the results of these observational studies have been relatively consistent, the results of intervention studies remain disappointing. Methodological problems could explain these negative results, like the selection of the population; a plausible assumption is that the older people who agree to take part in these intervention studies differ from those who refuse, and are those that are least likely to benefit from such programs. The aim of this study was (i) to study the determinants of participation in and adhesion to a prevention trial in a population of older individuals via a quantitative approach using a questionnaire, (ii) to study the representations and practices of prevention in this population using a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. METHOD: The study population for the ACCEPT study was recruited at the time of inclusion of subjects in a prevention trial. The population was made up of persons aged 70 years or older, living at home and demonstrating some form of frailty, defined as a spontaneous memory complaint to their general practitioner or difficulties in carrying out instrumental activities of daily living. We used a quantitative approach based on the administration of a self-completed questionnaire sent to 1680 subjects having accepted to take part in the prevention trial, and to the sample of subjects meeting the inclusion criteria but having refused to take part. The qualitative approach, carried out at the moment of inclusion, involved subjects that having accepted to take part and subjects that having refused. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in order to understand the logic leading to refusal or acceptance. CONCLUSION: The analysis of the results will combine the viewpoints of the different disciplines. It will allow us to better understand the logic at work, to characterise the populations at risk of refusal, and perhaps to remove some of the barriers to participation in prevention programs. The identification of such barriers will provide feedback in terms of the conception and management of prevention measures.
BACKGROUND: In the domain of Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention, various potentially protective factors have been identified in epidemiological studies. Although the results of these observational studies have been relatively consistent, the results of intervention studies remain disappointing. Methodological problems could explain these negative results, like the selection of the population; a plausible assumption is that the older people who agree to take part in these intervention studies differ from those who refuse, and are those that are least likely to benefit from such programs. The aim of this study was (i) to study the determinants of participation in and adhesion to a prevention trial in a population of older individuals via a quantitative approach using a questionnaire, (ii) to study the representations and practices of prevention in this population using a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews and focus groups. METHOD: The study population for the ACCEPT study was recruited at the time of inclusion of subjects in a prevention trial. The population was made up of persons aged 70 years or older, living at home and demonstrating some form of frailty, defined as a spontaneous memory complaint to their general practitioner or difficulties in carrying out instrumental activities of daily living. We used a quantitative approach based on the administration of a self-completed questionnaire sent to 1680 subjects having accepted to take part in the prevention trial, and to the sample of subjects meeting the inclusion criteria but having refused to take part. The qualitative approach, carried out at the moment of inclusion, involved subjects that having accepted to take part and subjects that having refused. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in order to understand the logic leading to refusal or acceptance. CONCLUSION: The analysis of the results will combine the viewpoints of the different disciplines. It will allow us to better understand the logic at work, to characterise the populations at risk of refusal, and perhaps to remove some of the barriers to participation in prevention programs. The identification of such barriers will provide feedback in terms of the conception and management of prevention measures.
Authors: Annette L Fitzpatrick; Linda P Fried; Jeff Williamson; Patricia Crowley; Delilah Posey; Linly Kwong; Janet Bonk; Roberta Moyer; Joyce Chabot; Lara Kidoguchi; Curt D Furberg; Steven T DeKosky Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2006-07-04 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Ronald E Holtzman; George W Rebok; Jane S Saczynski; Anthony C Kouzis; Kathryn Wilcox Doyle; William W Eaton Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: M Di Bari; M Pahor; L V Franse; R I Shorr; J Y Wan; L Ferrucci; G W Somes; W B Applegate Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-01-01 Impact factor: 4.897