Cited by 95Geriatric Care and Nursing HomesDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAging, Health, and Disability

BE-ACTIV for depression in nursing homes: primary outcomes of a randomized clinical trial

Open access
Meeks, Suzanne, Van Haitsma, Kimberly, Schoenbachler, Ben, Looney, Stephen W.·2015·The Journals of Gerontology: Series B

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To report the primary outcomes of a cluster randomized clinical trial of Behavioral Activities Intervention (BE-ACTIV), a behavioral intervention for depression in nursing homes. METHOD: Twenty-three nursing homes randomized to BE-ACTIV or treatment as usual (TAU); 82 depressed long-term care residents recruited from these nursing homes. BE-ACTIV participants received 10 weeks of individual therapy after a 2-week baseline. TAU participants received weekly research visits. Follow-up assessments occurred at 3- and 6-month posttreatment. RESULTS: BE-ACTIV group participants showed better diagnostic recovery at posttreatment in intent-to-treat analyses adjusted for clustering. They were more likely to be remitted than TAU participants at posttreatment and at 3-month posttreatment but not at 6 months. Self-reported depressive symptoms and functioning improved in both groups, but there were no significant treatment by time interactions in these variables. DISCUSSION: BE-ACTIV was superior to TAU in moving residents to full remission from depression. The treatment was well received by nursing home staff and accepted by residents. A large proportion of participants remained symptomatic at posttreatment, despite taking one or more antidepressants. The results illustrate the potential power of an attentional intervention to improve self-reported mood and functioning, but also the difficulties related to both studying and implementing effective treatments in nursing homes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/geronb/gbu026

Cites

60 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Only one published protocol paper and three trial registrations were located for the included studies.

    “We located only one published protocol paper (Dozeman 2011) and three trial registrations (Meeks 2008;Meeks 2015;Travers 2017).”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Meeks 2015

    The citing sentence identifies Meeks 2015 as a trial registration, but our copy is a report of the trial’s primary outcomes, not a registration. The Recruitment and Attrition section reports completed data collection and an intent-to-treat analysis of 82 participants; the copy does not establish the citing authors’ counts of other protocols or registrations. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the single study reporting long-term depression remission, participants allocated to the non-therapy comparator had an MDD prevalence increase from 25.0% at baseline to 65.2% at long-term follow-up, a 40.2% increase.

    “Amongst participants allocated to the non-therapy comparator, the prevalence of MDD increased from 25.0% to 65.2% (40.2% increase).”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Meeks 2015

    The Sample Characteristics section reports that 69.1% of the entire sample met criteria for a major depressive episode at baseline, with proportionally more major depressive disorder in the treatment-as-usual control group than in the BE-ACTIV group. That contradicts a 25.0% baseline MDD prevalence in the non-therapy comparator. The Diagnostic Recovery section reports follow-up recovery outcomes, not the claimed increase to 65.2%. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In Meeks 2015, among participants allocated to psychological therapy, MDD prevalence decreased from 47.6% at baseline to 43.4% at end-of-intervention (4.2% decrease); among non-therapy comparator, it increased from 25.0% to 75.0% (50.0% increase); net difference in change was 54.2%.

    “Amongst participants allocated to psychological therapy, the prevalence of MDD decreased from 47.6% at baseline to 43.4% at end-of-intervention follow-up (4.2% decrease).Amongst participants allocated to the non-therapy comparator, the prevalence of MDD increased from 25.0% at baseline to 75.0% at end-of-intervention follow-up (50.0%increase).The net difference in change in prevalence between”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Meeks 2015

    Sample Characteristics (page unavailable) says the Be-ACTIV group had proportionally fewer participants with major depressive disorder at baseline than the usual-care group—the opposite of the claimed 47.6% versus 25.0%. Diagnostic Recovery (page unavailable) reports posttreatment remission of 45.2% versus 15.0%, not the claimed prevalence changes or 54.2% net difference. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In Meeks 2015, at short-term follow-up, MDD prevalence among psychological therapy participants decreased from 47.6% to 43.4% (4.2% decrease), while among non-therapy comparator it increased from 25.0% to 75.0% (50.0% increase); net difference was 54.2%.

    “Amongst participants allocated to psychological therapy, the prevalence of MDD decreased from 47.6% at baseline to 43.4% at short-term follow-up (4.2% decrease).Amongst participants allocated to the non-therapy comparator, the prevalence of MDD increased from 25.0% at baseline to 75.0% at short-term follow-up (50.0%increase).The net difference in change in prevalence between conditions was 54.2%.”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Meeks 2015

    The Sample Characteristics section reports that major depressive disorder was proportionally less common in the Be-actiV group than in the treatment-as-usual group at baseline—the opposite of the claimed 47.6% versus 25.0%. The Diagnostic Recovery section reports improvement and remission at follow-up, not the stated MDD prevalence figures or a 54.2-percentage-point net difference. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Only four studies reported independent assessments of treatment fidelity.

    “Only four studies reported that independent assessments of treatment fidelity were conducted (Bailey 2017;Meeks 2008;Meeks 2015;Zerhusen 1991), although two of these studies had additional potential bias (Meeks 2008;Meeks 2015).”

    From Psychological therapies for depression in older adults residing in long-term care settings (2024) · cites this paper as Meeks 2015

    The Discussion (page not supplied) explicitly identifies the lack of an independent evaluator of treatment adherence as a limitation. The Treatment Integrity passage says the first author rated adherence from session recordings. Thus, although the paper reports fidelity assessments, it contradicts the claim that its assessments were independent. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L, Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (2002). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Non-patient edition. (SciD-i/NP) New York: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric institute.
  2. Reynolds, c. F., iii, Frank, e., Mazumdar, S., Meltzer, c. c., Mulsant, B. H., Pilkonis, P., … Smith, G. (1998). Behavioral and pharma- cologic interventions for depression in later life. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 18, 48-73.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meeks, S., Van Haitsma, K., Schoenbachler, B., & Looney, S. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Louisville (US)
  • Augusta University (US)
Venue
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B
Published
2014-04-01
Volume
70
Issue
1
Pages
13-23
ISSN
  • 1079-5014 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-5368
OpenAlex
W2109566249
Cited by
95
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5
FWCI
9.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series B (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH074865)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
depression, nursing homes, behavioral interventions, long-term care residents, remission, depressive symptoms, functional recovery, antidepressants, treatment acceptability
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Behavior Therapy, Female, Homes for the Aged, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nursing Homes, Remission Induction, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review