IntroductionIn low/middle-income countries (LMICs), the prevalence of people diagnosed with dementia is expected to increase substantially and treatment options are limited, with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors not used as frequently as in high-income countries (HICs). Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a group-based, brief, non-pharmacological intervention for people with dementia that significantly improves cognition and quality of life in clinical trials and is cost-effective in HIC. However, its implementation in other countries is less researched. This protocol describes CST-International; an implementation research study of CST. The aim of this research is to develop, test, refine and disseminate implementation strategies for CST for people with mild to moderate dementia in three LMICs: Brazil (upper middle-income), India (lower middle-income) and Tanzania (low-income).Methods and analysisFour overlapping phases: (1) exploration of barriers to implementation in each country using meetings with stakeholders, including clinicians, policymakers, people with dementia and their families; (2) development of implementation plans for each country; (3) evaluation of implementation plans using a study of CST in each country (n=50, total n=150). Outcomes will include adherence, attendance, acceptability and attrition, agreed parameters of success, outcomes (cognition, quality of life, activities of daily living) and cost/affordability; (4) refinement and dissemination of implementation strategies, enabling ongoing pathways to practice which address barriers and facilitators to implementation.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted for each country. There are no documented adverse effects associated with CST and data held will be in accordance with relevant legislation. Train the trainer models will be developed to increase CST provision in each country and policymakers/governmental bodies will be continually engaged with to aid successful implementation. Findings will be disseminated at conferences, in peer-reviewed articles and newsletters, in collaboration with Alzheimer’s Disease International, and via ongoing engagement with key policymakers.

Introduction Recent evidence suggests that growth restriction in utero may lead to neurocognitive disorders in late life, either through impaired brain development or adverse metabolic programming. Methods Systematic review of literature investigating the relationship between size at birth and cognitive abilities in late life. The search, data extraction, and rating for the quality of reporting were conducted independently by two researchers. Results Of 533 selected studies, 11 were included in this systematic review and 10 of these were from high‐income setting. Of these 11 studies, eight indicated that lower birth weight is a risk factor for lower cognitive function in late life, at least in high‐income countries. The reported effect sizes were small and it was not possible to conduct meta‐analyses because of clinical heterogeneity Discussion A modest association of lower birth weight with lower cognitive abilities in late life is consistent with persisting effects of the prenatal environment on brain function. As with all observational studies, confounding is an alternative explanation. Further studies are required to elucidate the mechanisms.

Background Knowledge of and attitudes towards dementia vary across countries, and for caregivers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), access to information can be challenging. There is an urgent need for brief, easily accessible and culturally appropriate educational courses for caregivers of persons with dementia, providing much needed information whilst addressing important psychological concepts such as stigma. Methods An international and multidisciplinary team developed Dementia Awareness for Caregivers (DAC) courses in four stages: (1) scoping review and module agreement, (2) development of an International template (DAC-International) containing a standardised process for adding information, (3) development of local DACs using a standardised format and (4) acceptability of courses in Brazil, India and Tanzania. Findings The DAC-International was developed, comprising three modules: ‘What is dementia?’; ‘Positive engagement’ and ‘Caring for someone with dementia’. Three local versions were developed from this (DAC-Brazil, DAC-India and DAC-Tanzania), where additions of country-specific information included prevalent stereotypes and the addition of culturally relevant case studies. An initial field test was conducted in each country ( n = 85), which indicated acceptability to participants. Conclusions The methods used here resulted in culturally valid and acceptable educational courses for carers of people with dementia. Future work will consist of large-scale, formal evaluations and the development of additional local courses.

Conclusion: This novel methodology can act as a template for implementation studies in diverse healthcare systems across the world. It is an effective means of devising socio-culturally informed Implementation Plans that account for economic realities, health equity and healthcare access.

Despite high burden of dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries (LMICs), only a small number of clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) have been conducted in these settings. It is essential that such trials use appropriate outcome measures that are methodologically robust and culturally appropriate to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. We carried out a systematic review to examine the evidence base and psychometric properties of measures employed in these studies in LMICs. A systematic search of published literature on randomised controlled trials (RCT) of psychosocial interventions for PwD in LMICs between 2008 and April 2020 was carried out. Measures employed in each of the eligible studies were identified and through a focused search, we further explored the evidence base and psychometric properties employing Terwee criteria. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The review identified 41 measures from 17 RCTS which fulfilled eligibility criteria and they examined effectiveness across the domains of cognition (n = 16), behaviour and psychological symptoms (n = 11) and quality of life (n = 8). Of these 41, we were able to access relevant literature only for 18 and they were subject to psychometric analysis. Psychometric properties of these 18 instruments were at best modest, with Terwee scores ranging from 3 (low) to 15 (moderate). A majority of the studies were from China (n = 5) and Brazil (n = 6). The evidence base for the routinely employed measures in RCTs of non‐pharmacological interventions for PwD in LMICs is limited. The quality of adaptation and validation of these instruments is variable and studies are largely uninformative about their psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness to the study setting. There is an urgent need to develop scientifically robust instruments in LMIC settings that can be confidently employed to measure outcomes in trials of psychosocial interventions for PwD.