METHODS: A total of 2084 community dwelling older adults from wave I and II were recruited through a multistage random sampling method. TUG was performed using the standard protocol and scores were then stratified based on with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI), gender and in a 5-year age groups ranging from ages of 60's to 80's.

RESULTS: 529(16%) participants were identified to have MCI. Past history of falls and medical history of hypertension, heart disease, joint pain, hearing and vision problem, and urinary incontinence were found to have influenced TUG performance. Cognitive status as a mediator, predicted TUG performance even when both gender and age were controlled for (B 0.24, 95% CI (0.02-0.47), β 0.03, t 2.10, p = 0.36). Further descriptive analysis showed, participants with MCI, women and older in age took a longer time to complete TUG, as compared to men with MCI across all age groups with exceptions for some age groups.

METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study, patients received flexible doses of Vortioxetine for a period of six months. All participants were assessed at baseline and scheduled for monitoring at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Depression severity was assessed using Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale. The Perceived Deficiency Questionnaire (PDQ-5) assessed the perceived cognitive difficulties in concentration, executive functioning, and memory. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC) was used to assess the patients' quality of life. Side effects of vortioxetine were monitored using the Antidepressant Side-Effect Checklist (ASEC).

RESULTS: Patients experienced a reduction in MADRS scores from 29.89 ± 5.997 at baseline to 11.59 ± 4.629 by Week 24. The PDQ-5 scores showed significant change from Week-4, whereas the EORTC role, emotional, and cognitive functioning scores showed a significant change from Week 2 onwards. CGI-Severity scores decreased from a baseline of 4.39 ± 0.746 to 2.41 ± 1.085 by Week 24. During the 24-Weeks of therapy, around three-quarters of the patients (73.3%) had one or more adverse events reported on the ASEC. The most frequently reported TEAEs were dry mouth, insomnia, somnolence, and headache, with more than a 30% incidence rate.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Delphi consensus technique was conducted online to review and evaluate the framework module. A panel of experts, including rehabilitation medicine physicians, occupational therapists, and clinical psychologists in Malaysia, was invited to participate in this study. For each round, the expert consensus was defined as more than 90% of the expert panel agreeing or strongly agreeing with the proposed items.

RESULTS: A total of 33 practitioners completed the three Delphi rounds. 72.7% of the expert panel have been practising in their relevant clinical fields for more than six years (M = 10.67, SD = 5.68). In Round 1, 23% of the experts suggested that the framework module for attention training required further improvements, specifically in the language (M = 1.97, SD = 0.75) and instructions (M = 2.03, SD = 0.71) provided. In Round 2, 15% of the experts recommended additional changes in the instruction (M = 2.15, SD = 0.67) for attention training. Amendments made to the framework module in line with the recommendations provided by the experts resulted in a higher level of consensus, as 94% to 100% of the experts in Round 3 concluded the framework module was suitable and comprehensive for our breast cancer survivors. Following the key results, the objectives were practical, and the proposed approaches, strategies, and techniques for attention and memory training were feasible. The clarity of the instructions, procedures, verbatim transcripts, and timeframe further enhanced the efficacy and utility of the framework module.