Cited by 120Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesBehavioral and Psychological Studies

Can Agitated Behavior of Nursing Home Residents with Dementia Be Prevented with the Use of Standardized Stimuli?

Open access
Cohen‐Mansfield, Jiska, Marx, Marcia S., Dakheel‐Ali, Maha, Regier, Natalie G., Thein, Khin, Freedman, Laurence·2010·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the relative effect of different types of stimuli on agitated behaviors of nursing home residents with dementia. DESIGN: Repeated‐measures design with randomized assignment of conditions. SETTING: Seven Maryland nursing homes. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred eleven nursing home residents with a diagnosis of dementia who exhibited agitation. INTERVENTION: Different types of stimuli (music, social stimuli, simulated social stimuli, and individualized stimuli based on the person's self‐identity) were presented. MEASUREMENTS: Agitation was directly observed and recorded using the Agitation Behavior Mapping Instrument. RESULTS: All stimulus categories were associated with significantly less physical agitation than baseline observations, and all except for manipulative stimuli were associated with significantly less total agitation. Live social stimuli were associated with less agitation than music, self‐identity, work, simulated social, and manipulative stimulus categories. Task and reading stimulus categories were each associated with significantly less agitation than work, simulated social, and manipulative stimulus categories. Music and self‐identity stimuli were associated with less agitation than simulated social and manipulative stimuli. CONCLUSION: Providing stimuli offers a proactive approach to preventing agitation in persons with dementia, with live social stimuli being the most successful.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02951.x

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Studies comparing touch found a significant improvement in symptomatic and clinically significant agitation compared with usual care.

    “Studies comparing touch found a significant improvement in symptomatic and clinically significant agitation compared with usual care. 22,34”

    From Non-pharmacological interventions for agitation in dementia: systematic review of randomised controlled trials (2014) · cites this paper as [22]

    The Results (page not provided) report significantly less agitation during several stimulus conditions than at baseline, and the Discussion describes baseline as regular nursing-home care. The Methods list the stimuli studied but do not identify a touch intervention; the paper also does not report a clinically significant improvement in agitation. Thus the general reduction in agitation is supported, but the touch-specific and clinical-significance claims are not. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Five included RCTs implemented group activities; those with standard activities reduced mean agitation levels and decreased symptoms in care homes while they were in place.

    “Five of the included RCTs implemented group activities; those with standard activities reduced mean agitation levels, and decreased symptoms in care homes while they were in place. 22,23”

    From Non-pharmacological interventions for agitation in dementia: systematic review of randomised controlled trials (2014) · cites this paper as [22]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [37]Morris J Hawes C Murphy K MDS Resident Assessment Natick, MA Eliot Press 1991
  2. [43]Cohen-Mansfield J Downs M Bowers B The language of behavior Excellence in Dementia Care England Open University Press 2008 187 211

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cohen‐Mansfield, J., Marx, M. S., Dakheel‐Ali, M., Regier, N. G., Thein, K., & Freedman, L.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08
Volume
58
Issue
8
Pages
1459-1464
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1502472383
Cited by
120
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG021497)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
dementia, agitation, nursing home residents, behavioral interventions, social stimuli, self-identity, long-term care
MeSH terms
Aged, 80 and over, Animals, Attention, Dementia, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Music, Nursing Homes, Object Attachment, Psychomotor Agitation, Self Concept, Geriatric Assessment

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