Our attention frequently shifts from ongoing tasks to internal content such that we find ourselves mind wandering (MW). Recent research has revealed that increasing age in adulthood is associated with a decrease in the frequency of MW, but the factors that contribute to this age-related effect are unclear. Thus, in the present study we conducted a meta-analysis of age differences in MW that aimed to analyze (a) the size and consistency of the age-related decrease in MW frequency, and (b) the moderating impact of methodological and sociodemographic factors. We analyzed studies comparing MW frequency in healthy younger and older groups and found a large effect in older adults. The age-related decrease in MW was more pronounced for probe compared to self-caught procedures, when task-related interfering thoughts were measured separately, when visual masks were presented, as the proportion of targets increased, and as older participants and fewer women were included in older adult groups. In discussing the theoretical and practical implications of these findings, we highlight the role of motivation and response options and provide recommendations for future research. These included emphasizing the need for open-ended methods in order to avoid bias due to MW instructions.

IntroductionMaintaining independence is a primary goal of community health and care services for older people, but there is currently insufficient guidance about which services to implement. Therefore, we aim to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of community-based complex interventions to sustain independence for older people, including the effect of frailty, and group interventions to identify the best configurations.Methods and analysisSystematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). We will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs of community-based complex interventions to sustain independence for older people living at home (mean age ≥65 years), compared with usual care or another complex intervention. We will search MEDLINE (1946 to September 2020), Embase (1947 to September 2020), CINAHL (1981 to September 2020), PsycINFO (1806 to September 2020), CENTRAL and clinical trial registries from inception to September 2020, without date/language restrictions, and scan included papers’ reference lists. Main outcomes were: living at home, activities of daily living (basic/instrumental), home-care services usage, hospitalisation, care home admission, costs and cost effectiveness. Additional outcomes were: health status, depression, loneliness, falls and mortality. Interventions will be coded, summarised and grouped. An NMA using a multivariate random-effects model for each outcome separately will determine the relative effects of different complex interventions. For each outcome, we will produce summary effect estimates for each pair of treatments in the network, with 95% CI, ranking plots and measures, and the borrowing of strength statistic. Inconsistency will be examined using a ‘design-by-treatment interaction’ model. We will assess risk of bias (Cochrane tool V.2) and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation for NMA approach.Ethics and disseminationThis research will use aggregated, anonymised, published data. Findings will be reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. They will be disseminated to policy-makers, commissioners and providers, and via conferences and scientific journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019162195.

No abstract

No abstract