An interventional study of Virtual Reality and Video Chat in Alzheimer Disease, Dementia and Caregiver Burnout, sponsored by University of California, Santa Barbara. Completed at 27 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-07-29.
Sponsored by University of California, Santa Barbara · Not applicable, Interventional, and Basic science
The purpose of this project is to test the impact of different forms of technology (virtual reality vs. video chat) on quality of life and family relationships in older adults who reside in senior living communities and an adult child who lives at a distance. The study will also investigate whether responses to the technology and quality of life outcomes depend on older adults' level of cognitive impairment.
Purpose of the clinical trial: The virtual reality (VR) program, Rendever, enables older adults in senior living communities to maintain important family relationships, engage fully with life, and reconnect with their past, regardless of physical location, through its advanced networking and live-streaming capabilities. This project will test the immediate and longer-term impact of the Rendever virtual reality platform (vs. video chat) on the quality of life of residents and their adult children in an experimental design. The study will also investigate whether responses to the technology and quality of life outcomes depend on older adults' level of cognitive impairment.
Participants: Participants will be older adults (age 50+) with mild cognitive impairments (MCI) or mild to moderate Alzheimer's Disease or related dementias (ADRD) who reside in senior living communities and an adult child who lives at a distance. The resident-adult child dyads (target N=192 dyads) will be recruited from 12 senior living communities in the greater Boston area and central California. Residents will participate from their senior living community and adult children will participate from their own home, at least 45 minutes driving distance away.
Study Design and Method: The design is a 2 (Intervention Group: Virtual Reality vs. Active Control) x 2 (Level of Cognitive Impairment: MCI vs. ADRD) x Time (7 time points) design. Dyads will be randomly assigned to an intervention group (Virtual Reality vs. Video Chat Control). Dependent variables will include quality of life, psychological and social well-being (loneliness, mental health, thriving, and relationship quality), caregiver guilt (guilt, stress, and burden), and positive engagement while using the technology. Outcomes will be assessed through surveys, interviews, and observational methods.
The experimental intervention will be implemented in a between-group design. Dyads will be randomly assigned to either the Virtual Reality Condition or the active Control Condition (video chat). Participants will complete a baseline survey (T1), followed by four activity sessions once a week for 4 consecutive weeks (T2-T5). Follow-up surveys will be conducted at 1-month (T6) and 3-months (T7) post-intervention for exploratory purposes (to determine if any effects of the technology are sustained over time). Residents and adult children will also be interviewed briefly after the intervention and at each follow-up. All sessions will be video and audiotaped. Computerized and human coding will examine positive engagement and interpersonal dynamics while using the technology.
Dyads assigned to the virtual reality (VR) condition will engage in 4 weekly VR sessions that include immersive virtual adventures (e.g., bucket list travel) and reminiscence activities (e.g., virtual life story). Dyads assigned to the control condition will engage in 4 weekly video chat sessions. During these sessions, dyads will engage in conversations that are typical in their daily lives. All other procedures will be identical in the two conditions.
Sample size, recruitment, and statistical power: A power analysis using simulation methods (for multi-level regression models and structural equation models) was used to determine the sample size. A sample size of 192 dyads (96 in each intervention condition) evenly split between cognitive impairment groups (MCI vs. dementia) will achieve a high level of power for detecting the minimal expected effect size (accounting for expected attrition).
Statistical analysis: Because data from parent-adult child dyads will be dependent, and because the dyad is the unit of analysis for assignment to experimental conditions, the analysis of quantitative data will utilize linear models designed for nested (clustered) data. Hypothesis testing will be conducted with multi-level, random-effects regression and multi-level structural equation modeling.
Study Aims:
AIM 1: Determine whether virtual reality (vs. control) improves quality of life for residents and their adult children who live at a distance.
AIM 2: Determine whether the positive effects of virtual reality (vs. control) on quality of life depend upon residents' level of cognitive impairment (MCI vs. mild to moderate AD/ADRD).
AIM 3: Determine whether virtual reality (vs. control) reduces caregiver guilt for adult children and whether these effects depend on the adult child's own responses to the technology and their parent's responses to the technology.
3,965 studies on the registry are indexed under Alzheimer Disease; 926 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 186 is above the median of 70 across 3,019 interventional studies indexed under Alzheimer Disease.
Browse Alzheimer Disease studies →University of California, Santa Barbara is the lead sponsor of 14 studies on the registry; 6 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Inclusion Criteria for older adults:
Inclusion Criteria for adult children:
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Short tests of memory and thinking, each scored out of 30. Lower scores suggest more difficulty; criteria give a range, either to include people with memory problems or to leave them out.
MMSE and MoCA
Short tests of memory and thinking, each scored out of 30. Lower scores suggest more difficulty; criteria give a range, either to include people with memory problems or to leave them out.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Weekly activities using virtual reality (Rendever)
Behavioral: Virtual Reality
Weekly activities using video conference (Zoom)
Behavioral: Video Chat
Older adults (residents of senior living communities) engage in four 20-minute virtual reality activities (via the Rendever platform) with their adult child each week for 4 consecutive weeks. The 4 sessions include immersive virtual adventures (e.g., bucket list travel) and reminiscence activities (e.g., virtual life story). Adult children participate remotely from their own homes.
Older adults (residents of senior living communities) engage in four 20-minute video chat sessions (via the Zoom platform) with their adult child each week for 4 consecutive weeks. Adult children participate remotely from their own homes.
Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease (QOL-AD) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
QOL-AD (R.G. Logsdon, 1996) is a 13-item self-report measure of quality of life (completed by older adult participants). (As a secondary outcome, adult children also reported on their parents' quality of life). Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Excellent. The total score is the mean of all items (range: 1 to 4). Higher scores indicate greater quality of life.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
An 11-item measure of thriving adapted from the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) and the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT; Su, R., Tay, L., \& Diener, E., 2014). This measure provides a holistic view of positive functioning (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree. The total score is the average of the 11 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of thriving.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
This scale includes 12 items from the longer PANAS (Watson, Clark, \& Tellegen, 1988), which measures two primary dimensions of mood. (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Participants rate the extent to which they experienced positive and negative emotions over the past week. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Quite a lot, 5 = Extremely. Separate subscale scores are calculated for positive emotion (6 items) and negative emotion (6 items) by averaging responses within each set (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores on the positive emotion subscale reflect greater positive mood during the past week, indicating better well-being. Higher scores on the negative emotion subscale reflect greater negative mood, indicating poorer well-being.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
GDS (Sheikh, J.I., \& Yesavage, J.A., 1986) is a 15-item self-report measure of depression (completed by older adult participants). Items are rated "Yes" or "No" and are scored "1" if the response reflects depressive symptoms. Total score is the sum of all items (range: 0 to 15). Higher scores indicate greater depression.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Mental Health Inventory (MHI) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
The MHI includes 5 items from the longer MHI (McHorney, Ware, \& Raczek, 1993) to assess depression, anxiety, and vitality during the past week (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1= None of the time, 2= A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = A good bit of the time, 5 = Most of the time, 6 = All of the time. The total score is the average of all 8 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate better mental health.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (Short Form) - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
The short form of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (Hughes, Waite, Hawkley, \& Cacioppo, 2008) is a 4-item scale widely used in field research with older adults, and adapted from the original scale (Russell D, Peplau LA, Cutrona CE, 1980). Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Often. The total score is the mean of the 4 items (range: 1 to 4). Higher scores indicate greater loneliness.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
Relationship closeness is assessed with 4 items from the Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (Dibble, Levine, \& Park, 2011). (Completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 7-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Somewhat disagree, 4 = Neutral, 5 = Somewhat agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strong Agree. The total score is the average of the 4 items (range: 1 to 7). Higher scores indicate greater relationship closeness.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Relationship Satisfaction - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
Global relationship satisfaction is assessed with 3 items adapted from Huston et al.'s (1986) relationship satisfaction scale (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Very, 5 = Almost completely, 6 = Completely. Total scores are the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Communal Coping - Changes From Baseline (Older Adult)
Communal coping is assessed with 3 items reflecting feelings of unity when combatting stress (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of communal coping.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
An 11-item measure of thriving adapted from the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) and the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT; Su, R., Tay, L., \& Diener, E., 2014). This measure provides a holistic view of positive functioning (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree. The total score is the average of the 11 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of thriving.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale Revised Short Form (CESD-R-10) - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
The CESD-R-10 (Björgvinsson, Kertz, Bigda-Peyton, McCoy, Aderka,2013) is a 10-item measure of depressive symptoms adapted from the longer CESD (completed by adult children). Participants are asked to report how they felt during the past week. Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 0 = Rarely or none of the time, 1 = Some or a little of the time, 2 = Occasionally or a moderate amount of the time, 3 = Most or all of the time. The total score is the mean of the 10 items, some reverse-scored (range: 0 to 3). Higher scores reflect more depressive symptoms, worse mental health.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
This scale includes 12 items from the longer PANAS (Watson, Clark, \& Tellegen, 1988), which measures two primary dimensions of mood. (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Participants rate the extent to which they experienced positive and negative emotions over the past week. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Quite a lot, 5 = Extremely. Separate subscale scores are calculated for positive emotion (6 items) and negative emotion (6 items) by averaging responses within each set (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores on the positive emotion subscale reflect greater positive mood during the past week, indicating better well-being. Higher scores on the negative emotion subscale reflect greater negative mood, indicating poorer well-being.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Mental Health Inventory (MHI) - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
The MHI includes 5 items from the longer MHI (McHorney, Ware, \& Raczek, 1993) to assess depression, anxiety, and vitality during the past week (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = None of the time, 2 = A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = A good bit of the time, 5 = Most of the time, 6 = All of the time. The total score is the average of all 8 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate better mental health.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
The PSS short form (completed by adult children) is a 4-item scale adapted from the longer PSS (Cohen, Kamarck, \& Mermelstein, 1983). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Almost never, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Fairly often, 5 = Very often. The total score is the average of the 4 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Caregiver Guilt/Grief Scale - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
This scale (completed by adult children) includes 13 items adapted from the caregiver guilt and grief scales (Wells, Jorm, Jordan, \& Lefroy, 1990). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1= Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = A moderate amount, 4 = A lot, 5 = Almost unbearably. The total score is the average of the 13 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate greater caregiver guilt/grief.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Relational Burnout/Load Scale - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
Relational burnout/load is assessed with 6 items from the Relational Load Scale (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 6 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of relational load/burnout.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
Relationship closeness is assessed with 4 items from the Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (Dibble, Levine, \& Park, 2011). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 7-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Somewhat disagree, 4 = Neutral, 5 = Somewhat agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strong Agree. The total score is the average of the 4 items (range: 1 to 7). Higher scores indicate greater relationship closeness.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Relationship Satisfaction - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
Global relationship satisfaction is assessed with 3 items adapted from Huston et al.'s (1986) relationship satisfaction scale (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Very, 5 = Almost completely, 6 = Completely. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Communal Coping - Changes From Baseline (Adult Child)
Communal coping is assessed with 3 items reflecting feelings of unity when combatting stress (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of communal coping.
Time frame: T1 (baseline, 1-week pre-intervention), T2 (1-week post-intervention), T3 (1-month post-intervention), T4 (3-months post-intervention)
Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) - Technology Sessions
Positive and negative emotions experienced during the technology sessions (completed by both the older adult and adult child). Rated on a scale from 1 to 5, and separate indices are computed for positive emotion and negative emotion. Higher scores represent greater positive and negative emotion. Scores will be averaged across the intervention period (4 weeks) for overall measures of positive/negative affect experienced during the intervention sessions. Higher positive emotion and lower negative emotion indicate a more favorable response during the technology session.
Time frame: Immediately after each of the 4 technology sessions during the intervention (one week apart)
Social and Conversational Engagement - Technology Sessions
Self-reported social and conversational engagement during the technology sessions will be assessed using items developed specifically for this study, based on findings from a pilot study. The items assess experiences such as learning something new, reminiscing, and sharing special moments (completed by both the older adult and adult child), with responses rated on a 5-point scale from 1 to 5. Items are averaged across the four-week intervention period to generate overall engagement scores across the intervention sessions. Higher scores indicate greater enjoyment and a more favorable response during the technology sessions.
Time frame: Immediately after each of the 4 technology sessions during the intervention (one week apart)
Relationship Satisfaction and Communication Quality - Technology Sessions
Multiple items are designed to assess features of relationship connection during the remote family sessions (completed by both the older adult and adult child). Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Subscales include (a) relational connection and (b) relational strain. Scores will be averaged across the intervention period (4 weeks) to obtain an overall score of relational connection and strain during the technology sessions. Higher connection and lower strain scores indicate a more favorable response during the technology sessions.
Time frame: Immediately after each of the 4 technology sessions during the intervention (one week apart)
Telepresence and Copresence - Technology Session
Self-reported ratings of immersion during the technology sessions will be completed by both the older adult and the adult child. Items were adapted for this project based on a pilot study and will assess experiences such as feeling like they are in the same room and interacting face-to-face. Responses will be rated on a scale from 1 to 5, where higher scores indicate greater immersion and co-presence. Finally, item ratings will be averaged across the four-week intervention period to generate overall composite scores for each item.
Time frame: Immediately after each of the 4 technology sessions during the intervention (one week apart)
Observational and Computer Coding - Social, Conversational, and Kinesic Engagement - Technology Sessions
To supplement the self-reports, trained raters will evaluate video and audio recordings of the sessions for conversational, emotional, and kinesic (physical) engagement. Human-coded items will use a 1-to-5 scale, with higher scores representing greater involvement. Subscales for older adults will measure (a) reminiscence, (b) conversational engagement, (c) conversational lead, (d) positive emotions, (e) active emotions, and (f) kinesic engagement; subscales for adult children will measure only (a) reminiscence, (b) conversational engagement, and (c) conversational lead. Additionally, an automated computer program will evaluate older adults' kinesic engagement, yielding metrics from 0 to 1 (higher values indicating greater physical engagement). All subscales and metrics will be averaged across the four-week intervention to generate overall composite engagement scores.
Time frame: Coded from audio and videotapes of each of the 4 technology (intervention) sessions.
Older adults with cognitive impairment and an adult child were recruited at 23 senior living communities in two geographic regions in the U.S. (Boston, MA, and Santa Barbara, CA) between October 2021 and December 2023, with the trial's primary completion in March 2024. Approximately half the older adults had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and half had mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease or related dementias (ADRD). A total of 186 dyads (372 participants) were enrolled.
| Milestone | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 96 | 90 |
| Baseline assessment | 96 | 90 |
| Started intervention | 92 | 84 |
| Completed intervention | 87 | 79 |
| Completed post-intervention assessment | 87 | 79 |
| 1-month follow-up assessment | 86 | 79 |
| 3-month follow-assessment | 84 | 78 |
| Completed | 84 | 78 |
| Not completed | 12 | 12 |
| Withdrew: Decline in health of older adult (unrelated to the intervention) | 5 | 2 |
| Withdrew: Dissatisfaction with surveys (length, time commitment, too personal) or other study procedures | 6 | 2 |
| Withdrew: Adverse response to the intervention - social strain | 0 | 2 |
| Withdrew: Adverse response to the intervention - discomfort using technology | 0 | 1 |
| Withdrew: External circumstances (family emergency, loss of wifi) | 0 | 2 |
| Withdrew: Participant no longer eligible due to history of seizures not previously reported | 0 | 1 |
| Withdrew: Death (unrelated to the intervention) | 1 | 2 |
QOL-AD (R.G. Logsdon, 1996) is a 13-item self-report measure of quality of life (completed by older adult participants). (As a secondary outcome, adult children also reported on their parents' quality of life). Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good, 4 = Excellent. The total score is the mean of all items (range: 1 to 4). Higher scores indicate greater quality of life.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 3.04 ± 0.41 | 3.00 ± 0.48 | 2.85 ± 0.49 | 2.94 ± 0.44 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 3.08 ± 0.36 | 2.98 ± 0.51 | 2.91 ± 0.44 | 3.07 ± 0.38 |
An 11-item measure of thriving adapted from the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) and the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT; Su, R., Tay, L., \& Diener, E., 2014). This measure provides a holistic view of positive functioning (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree. The total score is the average of the 11 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of thriving.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Older Adult | 3.97 ± 0.59 | 3.90 ± 0.58 | 3.63 ± 0.65 | 3.69 ± 0.56 |
| T2 - Older Adult | 4.00 ± 0.53 | 3.89 ± 0.68 | 3.62 ± 0.64 | 3.91 ± 0.52 |
This scale includes 12 items from the longer PANAS (Watson, Clark, \& Tellegen, 1988), which measures two primary dimensions of mood. (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Participants rate the extent to which they experienced positive and negative emotions over the past week. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Quite a lot, 5 = Extremely. Separate subscale scores are calculated for positive emotion (6 items) and negative emotion (6 items) by averaging responses within each set (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores on the positive emotion subscale reflect greater positive mood during the past week, indicating better well-being. Higher scores on the negative emotion subscale reflect greater negative mood, indicating poorer well-being.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Positive Emotions | 3.72 ± 0.68 | 3.73 ± 0.72 | 3.20 ± 0.91 | 3.18 ± 0.84 |
| T2 - Positive Emotions | 3.76 ± 0.58 | 3.65 ± 0.63 | 3.33 ± 0.87 | 3.53 ± 0.60 |
| T1 - Negative Emotions | 1.74 ± 0.51 | 1.90 ± 0.75 | 1.96 ± 0.82 | 1.65 ± 0.58 |
| T2 - Negative Emotions | 1.46 ± 0.42 | 1.70 ± 0.61 | 1.71 ± 0.64 | 1.54 ± 0.74 |
GDS (Sheikh, J.I., \& Yesavage, J.A., 1986) is a 15-item self-report measure of depression (completed by older adult participants). Items are rated "Yes" or "No" and are scored "1" if the response reflects depressive symptoms. Total score is the sum of all items (range: 0 to 15). Higher scores indicate greater depression.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 1.95 ± 2.16 | 2.73 ± 2.74 | 3.20 ± 2.98 | 2.82 ± 1.79 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 1.81 ± 2.16 | 3.20 ± 3.39 | 3.35 ± 2.99 | 2.34 ± 1.79 |
The MHI includes 5 items from the longer MHI (McHorney, Ware, \& Raczek, 1993) to assess depression, anxiety, and vitality during the past week (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1= None of the time, 2= A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = A good bit of the time, 5 = Most of the time, 6 = All of the time. The total score is the average of all 8 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate better mental health.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 5.22 ± 0.52 | 4.88 ± 0.87 | 4.81 ± 0.81 | 5.06 ± .66 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 5.19 ± 0.61 | 5.08 ± 0.74 | 4.94 ± 0.75 | 5.05 ± 0.72 |
The short form of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (Hughes, Waite, Hawkley, \& Cacioppo, 2008) is a 4-item scale widely used in field research with older adults, and adapted from the original scale (Russell D, Peplau LA, Cutrona CE, 1980). Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Often. The total score is the mean of the 4 items (range: 1 to 4). Higher scores indicate greater loneliness.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 1.98 ± 0.75 | 1.86 ± 0.81 | 1.96 ± .073 | 1.81 ± 0.67 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 1.71 ± 0.67 | 1.73 ± 0.79 | 1.95 ± 0.83 | 1.86 ± 0.87 |
Relationship closeness is assessed with 4 items from the Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (Dibble, Levine, \& Park, 2011). (Completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 7-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Somewhat disagree, 4 = Neutral, 5 = Somewhat agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strong Agree. The total score is the average of the 4 items (range: 1 to 7). Higher scores indicate greater relationship closeness.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Older Adult | 5.94 ± 1.11 | 6.29 ± 0.65 | 6.07 ± 0.75 | 5.78 ± 1.25 |
| T2 - Older Adult | 6.28 ± 0.74 | 6.39 ± 0.60 | 6.22 ± 0.72 | 6.18 ± 1.01 |
Global relationship satisfaction is assessed with 3 items adapted from Huston et al.'s (1986) relationship satisfaction scale (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Very, 5 = Almost completely, 6 = Completely. Total scores are the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Older Adult | 4.92 ± 1.21 | 5.17 ± 1.06 | 4.88 ± 1.17 | 4.99 ± 1.17 |
| T2 - Older Adult | 5.11 ± 0.95 | 4.24 ± 0.87 | 5.07 ± 0.95 | 5.19 ± 1.18 |
Communal coping is assessed with 3 items reflecting feelings of unity when combatting stress (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of communal coping.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Older Adult | 3.91 ± 0.77 | 3.94 ± 0.78 | 3.89 ± 0.85 | 3.93 ± 0.82 |
| T2 - Older Adult | 3.99 ± 0.77 | 3.98 ± 0.67 | 3.99 ± 0.71 | 4.14 ± 0.80 |
An 11-item measure of thriving adapted from the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT) and the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT; Su, R., Tay, L., \& Diener, E., 2014). This measure provides a holistic view of positive functioning (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree. The total score is the average of the 11 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of thriving.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Adult Child | 4.04 ± 0.54 | 4.22 ± 0.42 | 4.15 ± 0.51 | 4.02 ± 0.55 |
| T2 - Adult Child | 4.18 ± 0.50 | 4.31 ± 0.33 | 4.11 ± 0.54 | 4.09 ± 0.44 |
The CESD-R-10 (Björgvinsson, Kertz, Bigda-Peyton, McCoy, Aderka,2013) is a 10-item measure of depressive symptoms adapted from the longer CESD (completed by adult children). Participants are asked to report how they felt during the past week. Items are rated on a 4-point scale: 0 = Rarely or none of the time, 1 = Some or a little of the time, 2 = Occasionally or a moderate amount of the time, 3 = Most or all of the time. The total score is the mean of the 10 items, some reverse-scored (range: 0 to 3). Higher scores reflect more depressive symptoms, worse mental health.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 0.57 ± 0.42 | 0.42 ± 0.29 | .48 ± 0.48 | 0.53 ± 0.44 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 0.48 ± 0.44 | 0.33 ± 0.27 | 0.49 ± 0.45 | 0.47 ± 0.46 |
This scale includes 12 items from the longer PANAS (Watson, Clark, \& Tellegen, 1988), which measures two primary dimensions of mood. (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Participants rate the extent to which they experienced positive and negative emotions over the past week. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Quite a lot, 5 = Extremely. Separate subscale scores are calculated for positive emotion (6 items) and negative emotion (6 items) by averaging responses within each set (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores on the positive emotion subscale reflect greater positive mood during the past week, indicating better well-being. Higher scores on the negative emotion subscale reflect greater negative mood, indicating poorer well-being.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Positive Emotions | 3.99 ± 0.72 | 3.75 ± 0.53 | 3.56 ± 0.63 | 3.58 ± 0.53 |
| T2 - Positive Emotions | 3.51 ± 0.65 | 3.89 ± 0.45 | 3.59 ± 0.62 | 3.67 ± 0.55 |
| T1 - Negative Emotions | 1.73 ± 0.45 | 1.70 ± 0.36 | 1.78 ± 0.56 | 1.73 ± 0.46 |
| T2 - Negative Emotions | 1.64 ± 0.56 | 1.53 ± 0.35 | 1.77 ± 0.61 | 1.59 ± 0.43 |
The MHI includes 5 items from the longer MHI (McHorney, Ware, \& Raczek, 1993) to assess depression, anxiety, and vitality during the past week (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = None of the time, 2 = A little of the time, 3 = Some of the time, 4 = A good bit of the time, 5 = Most of the time, 6 = All of the time. The total score is the average of all 8 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate better mental health.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 4.88 ± 0.68 | 5.05 ± 0.54 | 4.98 ± 0.62 | 4.95 ± 0.63 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 4.96 ± 0.77 | 5.02 ± 0.76 | 5.03 ± 0.71 | 5.18 ± 0.58 |
The PSS short form (completed by adult children) is a 4-item scale adapted from the longer PSS (Cohen, Kamarck, \& Mermelstein, 1983). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Never, 2 = Almost never, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Fairly often, 5 = Very often. The total score is the average of the 4 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 - Baseline | 2.13 ± 0.65 | 1.89 ± 0.54 | 2.17 ± 0.64 | 2.02 ± 0.64 |
| T2 - Post-Intervention | 1.97 ± .60 | 1.89 ± 0.71 | 1.99 ± 0.69 | 1.83 ± 0.69 |
This scale (completed by adult children) includes 13 items adapted from the caregiver guilt and grief scales (Wells, Jorm, Jordan, \& Lefroy, 1990). Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1= Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = A moderate amount, 4 = A lot, 5 = Almost unbearably. The total score is the average of the 13 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate greater caregiver guilt/grief.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 1.77 ± 0.45 | 2.00 ± 0.66 | 2.15 ± 0.69 | 1.99 ± 0.72 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 1.74 ± 0.48 | 1.99 ± 0.63 | 2.12 ± 0.75 | 2.06 ± 0.64 |
Relational burnout/load is assessed with 6 items from the Relational Load Scale (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 6 items, some reverse-scored (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of relational load/burnout.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 1.80 ± 0.68 | 1.82 ± 0.57 | 1.95 ± 0.70 | 1.89 ± 0.72 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 1.76 ± 0.58 | 1.87 ± 0.64 | 1.88 ± 0.66 | 1.90 ± 0.72 |
Relationship closeness is assessed with 4 items from the Unidimensional Relationship Closeness Scale (Dibble, Levine, \& Park, 2011). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 7-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Somewhat disagree, 4 = Neutral, 5 = Somewhat agree, 6 = Agree, 7 = Strong Agree. The total score is the average of the 4 items (range: 1 to 7). Higher scores indicate greater relationship closeness.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 5.36 ± 1.53 | 5.80 ± 1.01 | 5.58 ± 1.13 | 5.67 ± 1.08 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 5.84 ± 1.31 | 5.78 ± 1.07 | 5.65 ± 1.15 | 5.44 ± 1.25 |
Global relationship satisfaction is assessed with 3 items adapted from Huston et al.'s (1986) relationship satisfaction scale (completed by older adults and adult children). Items are rated on a 6-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = A little, 3 = Somewhat, 4 = Very, 5 = Almost completely, 6 = Completely. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 6). Higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 4.38 ± 1.21 | 4.35 ± 1.29 | 4.08 ± 1.16 | 4.17 ± 1.27 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 4.70 ± 0.99 | 4.41 ± 1.26 | 4.21 ± 1.17 | 4.32 ± 1.23 |
Communal coping is assessed with 3 items reflecting feelings of unity when combatting stress (Afifi et al., 2019). (Completed by older adults and adult children.) Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree. The total score is the average of the 3 items (range: 1 to 5). Higher scores indicate a greater sense of communal coping.
| score on a scale | MCI Group/Video Chat | MCI Group/Virtual Reality | ADRD Group/Video Chat | ADRD Group/Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 (Baseline) | 3.31 ± 0.98 | 3.39 ± 0.87 | 3.24 ± 0.83 | 3.12 ± 1.09 |
| T2 (Post-Intervention) | 3.56 ± 0.93 | 3.46 ± 0.98 | 3.34 ± 0.79 | 3.32 ± 1.03 |
Positive and negative emotions experienced during the technology sessions (completed by both the older adult and adult child). Rated on a scale from 1 to 5, and separate indices are computed for positive emotion and negative emotion. Higher scores represent greater positive and negative emotion. Scores will be averaged across the intervention period (4 weeks) for overall measures of positive/negative affect experienced during the intervention sessions. Higher positive emotion and lower negative emotion indicate a more favorable response during the technology session.
| Score on a scale | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Older Adult - Positive Affect | 4.03 ± 0.59 | 4.14 ± 0.57 |
| Older Adult - Negative affect | 1.21 ± 0.29 | 1.15 ± 0.17 |
| Adult Child - Positive Affect | 3.65 ± 0.66 | 3.88 ± 0.59 |
| Adult Child - Negative affect | 1.19 ± 0.29 | 1.18 ± 0.21 |
Self-reported social and conversational engagement during the technology sessions will be assessed using items developed specifically for this study, based on findings from a pilot study. The items assess experiences such as learning something new, reminiscing, and sharing special moments (completed by both the older adult and adult child), with responses rated on a 5-point scale from 1 to 5. Items are averaged across the four-week intervention period to generate overall engagement scores across the intervention sessions. Higher scores indicate greater enjoyment and a more favorable response during the technology sessions.
| score on a scale | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Older Adult - Enjoyed learning something new | 3.81 ± 0.62 | 4.20 ± 0.59 |
| Older Adult - Enjoyed reminiscing | 3.57 ± 0.86 | 4.17 ± 0.61 |
| Older Adult - Shared special moments | 4.28 ± 0.50 | 4.48 ± 0.44 |
| Adult Child - Enjoyed learning something new | 3.41 ± 0.76 | 3.86 ± 0.71 |
| Adult Child - Enjoyed reminiscing | 3.55 ± 0.78 | 3.90 ± 0.65 |
| Adult Child - Shared special moments | 4.03 ± 0.59 | 4.23 ± 0.54 |
Multiple items are designed to assess features of relationship connection during the remote family sessions (completed by both the older adult and adult child). Items are rated on a scale from 1 to 5. Subscales include (a) relational connection and (b) relational strain. Scores will be averaged across the intervention period (4 weeks) to obtain an overall score of relational connection and strain during the technology sessions. Higher connection and lower strain scores indicate a more favorable response during the technology sessions.
| score on a scale | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Older Adult - Relational Connection | 4.48 ± 0.38 | 4.45 ± 0.37 |
| Older Adult - Relational Strain | 1.45 ± 0.34 | 1.31 ± 0.34 |
| Adult Child - Relational Connection | 4.23 ± 0.51 | 4.13 ± 0.47 |
| Adult Child - Relational Strain | 1.56 ± 0.45 | 1.51 ± 0.39 |
Self-reported ratings of immersion during the technology sessions will be completed by both the older adult and the adult child. Items were adapted for this project based on a pilot study and will assess experiences such as feeling like they are in the same room and interacting face-to-face. Responses will be rated on a scale from 1 to 5, where higher scores indicate greater immersion and co-presence. Finally, item ratings will be averaged across the four-week intervention period to generate overall composite scores for each item.
| score on a scale | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Older Adult - Felt like being in the same room | 3.50 ± 1.00 | 3.77 ± 0.91 |
| Older Adult - Felt like face-to-face | 3.85 ± 0.77 | 3.47 ± 0.94 |
| Adult Child - Felt like being in the same room | 3.17 ± 0.90 | 3.31 ± 0.73 |
| Adult Child - Felt like face-to-face | 3.31 ± 0.84 | 2.85 ± 0.82 |
To supplement the self-reports, trained raters will evaluate video and audio recordings of the sessions for conversational, emotional, and kinesic (physical) engagement. Human-coded items will use a 1-to-5 scale, with higher scores representing greater involvement. Subscales for older adults will measure (a) reminiscence, (b) conversational engagement, (c) conversational lead, (d) positive emotions, (e) active emotions, and (f) kinesic engagement; subscales for adult children will measure only (a) reminiscence, (b) conversational engagement, and (c) conversational lead. Additionally, an automated computer program will evaluate older adults' kinesic engagement, yielding metrics from 0 to 1 (higher values indicating greater physical engagement). All subscales and metrics will be averaged across the four-week intervention to generate overall composite engagement scores.
| Score on a scale | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| Older Adult - Reminiscence | 3.00 ± 1.02 | 3.79 ± 0.70 |
| Older Adult - Conversational Engagement | 4.45 ± 0.58 | 4.41 ± 0.51 |
| Older Adult - Conversational Lead | 2.46 ± 1.02 | 2.81 ± 1.04 |
| Older Adult - Positive Emotional Engagement | 4.29 ± 0.68 | 4.29 ± 0.51 |
| Older Adult - Active Emotional Engagement | 3.70 ± 0.86 | 3.97 ± 0.70 |
| Older Adult - Kinesic Engagement | 2.69 ± 0.91 | 3.11 ± 0.85 |
| Older Adult- Automated Computer Coding of Kinesic Engagement | 0.033 ± 0.016 | 0.039 ± 0.013 |
| Adult Child - Reminiscence | 3.02 ± 1.01 | 3.75 ± 0.78 |
| Adult Child - Conversational Engagement | 4.56 ± 0.42 | 4.45 ± 0.49 |
| Adult Child - Conversational Lead | 3.00 ± 1.07 | 2.49 ± 0.96 |
Collected over 4 months (participant enrollment through 3-month follow-up). Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Video Chat | 2/96 (2.1%) | 0/96 (0%) | 3/96 (3.1%) |
| Virtual Reality | 2/90 (2.2%) | 0/90 (0%) | 2/90 (2.2%) |
| Event | Video Chat | Virtual Reality |
|---|---|---|
| HospitalizationGeneral disorders | 3/96 | 2/90 |
A total of 186 dyads (372 individuals) enrolled and completed a brief intake survey on demographics and health. Of these, 96 dyads (N=193) were assigned to the Video Chat arm and 90 (N=180) to the Virtual Reality arm. The intake survey was completed at enrollment; the full baseline survey occurred later, after some dyads withdrew. Thus, the number of baseline cases may vary slightly depending on the source of the variable being reported (intake vs. full baseline survey).
| Age, Continuous(years) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older Adults | 85.86 ± 6.98 | 85.68 ± 8.06 | 85.77 ± 7.50 |
| Adult Children | 56.72 ± 9.63 | 56.03 ± 10.47 | 56.38 ± 10.03 |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older Adults — Female | 67 | 61 | 128 |
| Older Adults — Male | 29 | 29 | 58 |
| Adult Children — Female | 61 | 50 | 111 |
| Adult Children — Male | 35 | 40 | 75 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older Adults — Hispanic or Latino | 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Older Adults — Not Hispanic or Latino | 93 | 85 | 178 |
| Older Adults — Unknown or Not Reported | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Adult Children — Hispanic or Latino | 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Adult Children — Not Hispanic or Latino | 94 | 84 | 178 |
| Adult Children — Unknown or Not Reported | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older Adults — American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Older Adults — Asian | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Older Adults — Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Older Adults — Black or African American | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Older Adults — White | 94 | 87 | 181 |
| Older Adults — More than one race | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Older Adults — Unknown or Not Reported | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Adult Children — American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adult Children — Asian | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Adult Children — Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Adult Children — Black or African American | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Adult Children — White | 90 | 87 | 177 |
| Adult Children — More than one race | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Adult Children — Unknown or Not Reported | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Region of Enrollment(participants) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 189 | 175 | 364 |
| Australia | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Canada | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Colombia | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Denmark | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Germany | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Switzerland | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Cognitive Group (MCI/ADRD) - Older adults(Participants) | Video Chat | Virtual Reality | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCI | 44 | 41 | 85 |
| ADRD | 52 | 49 | 101 |
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: Yes — Deidentified data and related information will be made available to researchers and data analysts at no cost through NACDA-Open Aging Repository (NACDA-OAR), which is an NIH-funded repository. Quantitative data, codebooks, descriptions of missing data, and any errors will be made available on the site. The data submitted will conform to the NACDA-OAR standards.
Supporting information: Study protocol, Informed consent form
Time frame: Deidentified data and related files will be made available in the NACDA-OAR repository no later than within one year of the completion of the funded project period or upon the first publication of the data online. Data will be posted indefinitely.
Access criteria: Data will be deposited and made available through NACDA-Open Aging Repository (NACDA-OAR) and will be shared with investigators working under an institution with a Federal Wide Assurance (FWA). Data can be used for secondary study purposes. Users will be required to register on the password-protected site in order to access the data files, which includes agreeing to the conditions of use related to the public release of the data. This includes not using any identifying information, ethical reporting, not selling the data to third parties, acknowledging the data source, and destroying the data upon use.
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of California, Santa Barbara