Cited by 121Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

Light Treatment for Neuropsychiatric Behaviors in Alzheimer's Disease

Open access
Dowling, Glenna A., Graf, Carla L., Hubbard, Erin M., Luxenberg, Jay S.·2007·Western Journal of Nursing Research

Abstract

Neuropsychiatric behaviors are common in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and make both professional and lay caregiving difficult. Light therapy has been somewhat successful in ameliorating disruptive behaviors. This randomized trial tested the effects of morning or afternoon bright light exposure compared with usual indoor light on the presence, frequency, severity, and occupational disruptiveness of neuropsychiatric behaviors in nursing home residents with AD. Light was administered for 1 hr daily (Monday-Friday) for 10 weeks. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory—Nursing Home was used to assess behavior at baseline and end of the intervention. Analyses revealed statistically significant differences between groups on agitation/aggression, depression/dysphoria, aberrant motor behavior, and appetite/eating disorders. The magnitude of change was small and may not represent clinically significant findings. Agitation/aggression and nighttime behaviors commonly occurred and were highly correlated with occupational disruptiveness. Interventions that decrease the presence and/or severity of neuropsychiatric behaviors have the potential to significantly decrease caregiver burden.

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 · 10.1177/0193945907303083

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Training paid caregivers in person-centred care, communication skills training or dementia care mapping was investigated in five RCTs, and all interventions included supervision during training and implementation.

    “Training paid caregivers in these techniques was investigated in five RCTs. 35-39 All interventions included supervision during training and implementation.”

    From Non-pharmacological interventions for agitation in dementia: systematic review of randomised controlled trials (2014) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Abstract (page unavailable) identifies this randomized trial as a comparison of bright-light exposure with usual indoor light for nursing-home residents with Alzheimer’s disease. The Method (page unavailable) describes light-exposure sessions, not training paid caregivers in person-centred care, communication skills, or dementia care mapping. It does not describe supervision of caregiver training or implementation. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Two studies of improving communication skills or person-centred care for participants with symptomatic agitation found significant improvements compared with the control group during the intervention, and up to 6 months afterwards.

    “Two studies of improving communication skills or person-centred care for participants with symptomatic agitation found significant improvements compared with the control group during the intervention, 37,38 and up to 6 months afterwards. 37”

    From Non-pharmacological interventions for agitation in dementia: systematic review of randomised controlled trials (2014) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Results report a bright-light trial, not studies of communication skills or person-centred care. They also report that agitation/aggression increased in the morning-light group while decreasing in the control group from baseline to the end of the intervention—the opposite of the claimed improvement. The Abstract describes assessment at baseline and intervention end, not a six-month follow-up. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There were statistically significant differences between morning light exposure and afternoon light exposure in agitation/aggression scores (p = 0.032) and between morning light and indoor light in aberrant motor behavior (AMB) scores at the end of intervention (p = 0.021).

    “There were statistically significant differences between morning light exposure and afternoon light exposure in agitation/aggression scores (p = 0.032) and between morning light and indoor light in aberrant motor behavior (AMB) scores at the end of intervention (p = 0.021).”

    From Nonpharmacological Interventions to Reduce Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia: A Systematic Review (2015) · cites this paper as [36]

    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. Hozumi S, Okawa M, Mishima K, Hishakawa Y, Hori H, Takahashi K, et al. Phototherapy for elderly patients with dementia and sleep-wake rhythm disorders—A comparison between morning and evening light exposure. Japanese Journal of Psychiatry and Neurology. 1990;44(4):813–814. [Google Scholar]
  2. Lyketsos CG, Veiel LL, Baker A, Steele C. A randomized, controlled trial of bright light therapy for agitated behaviors in dementia patients residing in long-term care. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 1999;14:520–525. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dowling, G. A., Graf, C. L., Hubbard, E. M., & Luxenberg, J. S.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Institute on Aging (US)
  • Jewish Home (US)
Corresponding author
Dowling, Glenna A.
Venue
Western Journal of Nursing Research
Published
2007-12
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
961-975
ISSN
  • 0193-9459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8456
OpenAlex
W1994929688
Cited by
121
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Western Journal of Nursing Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Nursing Research (NR002968, R01NR002968)
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, bright light therapy, light exposure timing, nursing home residents, agitation and aggression, aberrant motor behavior, eating disorders, nocturnal activity, caregiver burden
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Analysis of Variance, Feeding and Eating Disorders, Mental Disorders, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nursing Assessment, Nursing Homes, Phototherapy, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychomotor Agitation, San Francisco, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Clinical Nursing Research, Geriatric Assessment, 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