Search PubMedSearch

subject

Aged, 80 and over

Aged, 80 and over: explore 21 source-linked works published from 2026 to 2026, with original documents and citations.

This collection is a preview while coverage and quality are evaluated.

Search within this collection

Coverage and selection

Includes records with this source-supplied label or an explicit phrase match in their metadata. Matches indicate a mention, not proof that a paper uses a method or tests a material. Source versions are consolidated by DOI.

Sources: pubmed. Collection updated 2026-09-15. Counts describe this index, not the complete source archives.

Post-intervention effectiveness of a computerized personalized cognitive stimulation program adapted according to cognitive reserve in older adults without cognitive impairment in Primary Care: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive reserve may influence responsiveness to cognitive interventions, yet it is rarely used to tailor computerized stimulation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a computerized cognitive stimulation program personalized according to cognitive reserve on cognition, reserve-related activities, and digital competence in community-dwelling older adults without cognitive impairment in Primary Care. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 102 adults aged ≥65 years with normal cognitive performance were recruited from three primary care centers in Zaragoza, Spain, and stratified by cognitive reserve level before random allocation to intervention or control. The intervention comprised digital literacy sessions followed by 8 weeks of home-based computerized cognitive stimulation tailored to participants' cognitive reserve profiles and life history. Controls received a single group-based health education session focused on maintaining everyday cognitive activity. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and post-intervention using global cognition (MEC-35), the Cognitive Reserve Questionnaire, the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire-16, and domain-specific neuropsychological tests. A total of 100 participants completed the final evaluation and were included in complete-case analyses. RESULTS: Compared with controls, the intervention group showed greater adjusted post-intervention improvements in global cognition (MEC-35 between-group difference: 1.8 points) and several cognitive measures, including temporal orientation, calculation, attention, praxis, verbal fluency, processing speed, executive functions, and verbal learning. CRQ scores and digital competence also improved, with small-to-large effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: A computerized cognitive stimulation program adapted according to cognitive reserve appears feasible in Primary Care and may improve cognition, engagement in reserve-related activities, and digital competence in older adults without cognitive impairment.

Humans

Mealtime satisfaction in public nursing homes: Associations with sensory, foodservice, and dining-room environment factors.

Satisfaction with meals is commonly used to assess how meals are experienced in nursing homes (NH), although limited evidence compares breakfast, lunch, and dinner within a unified analytical framework. This study examined the sensory and contextual factors associated with satisfaction across meals in public NH. A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using structured interviews with 290 residents aged &#x2265;60 years (median 85 years; Q1-Q3: 81-88; 63.1% women) from 19 facilities in Galicia, Spain. Overall satisfaction and 12 factors related to sensory attributes of the food, foodservice characteristics, and dining-room environment were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive analyses used medians and quartiles, and group comparisons were performed using nonparametric tests. Three multivariable linear regression models, one per meal, were estimated including all factors simultaneously. In adjusted models, the largest standardized coefficients were observed for taste (lunch: &#x3b2;&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.366; P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001), food temperature at serving (dinner: &#x3b2;&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.319; P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001), and menu variety (breakfast: &#x3b2;&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.301; P&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001). Taste, food temperature at serving, menu variety, and meal schedule showed statistically significant coefficients in all models. Overall satisfaction was lower at dinner (29.0%&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;4) than at breakfast (34.8%) and lunch (34.5%) (P&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.003). Selected dining-room environment factors showed significant coefficients in meal-specific models. Mealtime satisfaction was mainly associated with sensory and contextual factors related to how meals are perceived. Lower satisfaction at dinner suggests this mealtime as a relevant context for understanding variations in meal perception in NH residents.

Humans

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of RIPK1 inhibitor, SAR443820, in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (HIMALAYA): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: RIPK1, a protein regulating inflammatory signalling and cell death, is implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) pathophysiology. SAR443820 is a selective, oral, CNS-penetrant, reversible RIPK1 inhibitor. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of SAR443820 in participants with ALS. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was conducted at 63 clinical sites in 13 countries (Belgium, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA). Adults (aged 18-80 years) with a diagnosis of possible ALS, clinically probable ALS, clinically probable laboratory-supported ALS, or clinically definite ALS, in accordance with the revised El Escorial World Federation of Neurology criteria, were randomly assigned (2:1) by use of a stratified block design (blocks of three) to receive either 20 mg SAR443820 orally twice per day or matching placebo in the 24-week double-blind period. Randomisation was done centrally using interactive response technology and stratified by geographical region of trial site, region of ALS onset, use of riluzole, use of edaravone, and use of the combination of sodium phenylbutyrate and taurursodiol. Participants, care providers, investigators, and outcomes assessors were masked to trial intervention. The primary outcome was a change in ALS Functional Rating Scale Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score from baseline to week 24 and was calculated for all participants who had an ALSFRS-R total score available at baseline and at week 24. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants receiving one dose or more of trial intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05237284) and was terminated early. FINDINGS: Between April 13, 2022, and July 17, 2023, 397 participants were screened and 305 randomly assigned to SAR443820 (n=203) or placebo (n=102); six were excluded from the primary analysis due to missing baseline ALSFRS-R values. Mean age was 56&#xb7;9 years (SD 11&#xb7;5); 183 (60%) participants were male and 122 (40%) were female. Least squares mean change in ALSFRS-R from baseline to week 24 was -6&#xb7;73 (95% CI -7&#xb7;48 to -5&#xb7;98) for SAR443820 group (n=169) and -6&#xb7;32 (-7&#xb7;36 to -5&#xb7;27) for placebo group (n=87). There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups (least squares mean difference -0&#xb7;41 [95% CI -1&#xb7;71 to 0&#xb7;88]). Participants in the SAR443820 group had higher incidence of adverse events (171 [85%] of 202 vs placebo 80 [78%] of 102) and treatment discontinuations (28 [14%] of 202 vs placebo five [5%] of 102), with elevated hepatic enzymes being the most common cause. Nine deaths occurred in the double-blind period (seven [3%] of 202 in the SAR443820 group and two [2%] of 102 in the placebo group); none was attributed to SAR443820. INTERPRETATION: SAR443820 did not show clinical benefit and was associated with higher hepatic enzyme increase, indicating that further clinical development of SAR443820 in ALS is not warranted. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Humans
Compare source metadata on this page

These are bibliographic comparisons, not experimental rankings. Follow the original document for methods and conditions.