Feasibility of the Mindfulness Self-Compassionate Care (MASC) Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial to address Dementia Caregiver Stress

Clicks: 1
ID: 314604
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #125 of 155 articles by views in the gerontologist

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 155 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objectives We tested the feasibility and preliminary effects of the Mindfulness Self-Compassionate Care (MASC) program for dementia caregivers’ stress triggered by the care recipients’ neuropsychiatric symptoms. Research Design and Methods Single-blind Stage 1B pilot randomized (2:1) controlled trial compared 6 weeks of MASC (n = 45) with a time and dose-matched education control (n = 23; Healthy Living for Caregivers [HLC]). T-tests examined within and between-group differences. Results Most feasibility benchmarks were met. Mechanistic targets of mindfulness (p < .001; d = .58), self-compassion (p =.04; d = .32), self-efficacy (p < .001, d=.58), and distress from neuropsychiatric symptoms (p=.04, d=.33) showed small to medium pre-post improvements in the MASC group. Mechanistic validity was established through significant correlations between change in stress and change in mindfulness (r =-.58, p <.001), compassion (r =-.43, p =.003), self-compassion (r =-.77, p = <.000), self-efficacy (r =-.50, p =.001), and distress from dementia related neuropsychiatric symptoms (r =.33, p =.03). Pre-post improvements in MASC were not statistically significantly different compared with HLC for stress (t (64) =-1.07, p= .29) or other outcomes. Discussion and Implications The current study demonstrated feasibility and mechanistic target engagement and validity for MASC. As expected in an underpowered feasibility trial, clinical outcomes did not improve more than control, but trends favored MASC. These findings support a fully powered Stage 2 trial to test the efficacy of MASC compared with HLC.
Reference Key
openalex_W7161956231 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Ana-Maria Vranceanu, Claire Szapary, Maggie Crean, Sahana Giridharan, Shelley R. Adler, Arden O’Donnell, Natalia Santiago-Giraldo, Robert Parker, Christine S Ritchie
Journal the gerontologist
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/geront/gnag111
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnag111
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.