AzTrials
AzTrials

Intergenerational RelationsReFrame-PNCT07494071

Improving Family Communication in Older Adults: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

A study testing ReFrame-R in people with Intergenerational Relations, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.

Active, not recruiting

Under way, not looking for participants. Everyone needed has enrolled. The study is still running.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This study evaluates the effectiveness of "ReFrame-R," a communication training program designed to help older adults in Hong Kong navigate intergenerational challenges. By focusing on enhancing communication competence and clarifying role boundaries within parent-child relationships, the research seeks to determine… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 60 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Intergenerational Relations
What is being tested?
ReFrame-R
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
42 participants
Where
1 siteHong Kong
Study dates
23 Mar 2026to Jun 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 60 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Cantonese-speaking older adults
  • have regular contact with adult children
  • can comprehend traditional Chinese

Who cannot join

  • known mental health diagnosis
  • mild or higher depressive symptoms (scored ≥5 on the Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9; Kroenke et al., 2001; Manea et al., 2015])
  • communication difficulties

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Hong Kong1 site

  • The University of Hong Kong

    Hong Kong, 000000

Other trials in Hong Kong

About this study

Official title: Pilot Evaluation of ReFrame-R: A Communication Training to Reframe Older Adults' Family Roles and Promote Active Aging

This study evaluates the effectiveness of "ReFrame-R," a communication training program designed to help older adults in Hong Kong navigate intergenerational challenges. By focusing on enhancing communication competence and clarifying role boundaries within parent-child relationships, the research seeks to determine if this specialized intervention can improve the mental well-being of both older and younger generations. The study asks whether participating in the "ReFrame-R" curriculum leads to measurable improvements in how families interact, hypothesizing that older adults in the training group will demonstrate significantly better communication quality and a stronger sense of meaning compared to those in a control group. This study also aims to evaluate the program's overall feasibility and acceptability.

Being tested
ReFrame-R
Keywords
Intergenerational Communication, Pilot randomized controlled trial, Meaning in life, Motivational interviewing, Parent adult±child relationship

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • ReFrame-RBehavioural

    The ReFrame-R program is adapted from an established Motivational Interviewing (MI) protocol for laypersons (Kline et al., 2022). Grounded in Family Systems Theory, the curriculum specifically addresses over-functioning and under-functioning dynamics often found in older parent-adult child dyads and the cultural specific context of Hong Kong. Unlike general communication workshops, this program emphasizes role boundaries within parent-adult child relationship.

Study groups in NCT07494071
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
ReFrame-R trainingExperimentalThe ReFrame-R comprises four weekly 90-minute group sessions (total 6 hours), supplemented by brief weekly individual consultations to troubleshoot barriers and reinforce home practice. Adapted from an existing MI protocol for lay people (Kline et al., 2022), the program is grounded in Family Systems Theory to address over-/underfunctioning dynamics in older parent-adult child relationships, while also emphasizing empathic listening and autonomy-supportive communication. An MI skills booklet will be distributed to support and record home practice.
Receives: Behavioral: ReFrame-R
Control groupNo interventionParticipants in the control group will not receive active training during the study period. They will be provided with the same MI skills booklet for reference and self-directed practice.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Perceived communication competence

    Participants' self-perceived communication competence is assessed using an 11-item scale adapted from the Family Communication Scale (FCS). The scale consists of 10 items adapted from the original FCS to measure perceived ability to engage in positive communication with adult children, plus an additional item regarding overall communicagtion competence. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale (1-5), with a total score ranging from 11 to 55. Higher scores indicate a higher level of perceived communication competence.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

  2. Meaning in life

    The 10-item Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ; Steger et al., 2006) is used. It consists of two subscales: presence of meaning (5 items) and search of meaning (5 items). Each subscale is rated on a 7-point scale, with summed scores are calculated (ranged 5-35 for each). Higher scores indicate stronger sense of purpose and motivation to find meaning, respectively.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

Secondary outcomes (7)

  1. Self-efficacy

    Participants' self-efficacy will be assessed using the 6-item General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE-6; Romppel et al., 2013). It is typically rated on a 4-point scale from 1 to 4. Total scores range from 6 to 24, with higher scores reflecting greater perceived self-efficacy.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

  2. Well-being

    The 5-item WHO Well-Being Index will be adopted for measuring participants' subjective well-being (Bech, 1998; Kong et al., 2016), rated on a 7-point scale. The WHO-5 score ranges from 0 to 25, zero representing worst possible mental well-being and 25 representing best possible mental well-being.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

  3. Role boundaries

    We used a 5-item scale adapted from the Control subscale of the Parent-Adult Child Relationship Questionnaire's Relationship with Father component (PACQF; Peisah et al., 1999). While the original scale assess children's perceptions of parental conrtol, this adapted version is a self-report measure for parent to assess their attempt to maintain power, influence, or dominance over their adult children. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale, with a total score ranging 5-25. Higher scores indicater higher levels of parent control, reflecting weaker awareness of role boundaries in parent-adult children relationship.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

  4. Family functioning

    The 5-item Family Adaption, Partnership, Growth, Affection, Resolve questionnaire (Family APGAR; Chan et al., 1988; Smilkstein, 1978) is used. This scale assesses participants' satisfaction with five aspects of family function. Each item is rated on a 3-point scale (0-2), with a total score ranged from 0 to 10. Higher scores indicate better family functioning.

    Measured: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training

  5. Training appropriateness

    We used the 4-item Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) from Weiner et al (2017) to access training appropriateness. All items are rated on a 5-point scale (1-5), with an average score being calculated. Higher scores indicate greater perceived appropriateness of training.

    Measured: Week 6 (2 week follow-up)

  6. Training acceptability

    The 4-item Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) from Weiner et al (2017) is adopted to access training appropriateness. All items are rated on a 5-point scale (1-5), with an average score being calculated. Higher scores indicate greater perceived acceptability of training.

    Measured: Week 6 (2 week follow-up)

  7. Training feasibility

    This study used the 4-item Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) from Weiner et al (2017) to access training feasibility. All items are rated on a 5-point scale (1-5), with an average score being calculated. Higher scores indicate greater perceived feasibility of training.

    Measured: Week 4 (end of training)

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted27 Mar 2026
  2. Study start23 Mar 2026
  3. Primary completionDec 2026 (estimated)
  4. Study completionJun 2027 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
42 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07494071
Sponsor's protocol ID
EA260121
Other IDs
2501262488
Acronym
ReFrame-P
Status last verified
Sep 2026
First submitted
16 Mar 2026
Last updated
9 Sep 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Yu, Y. M. B., Lam, C., & Chan, C. S. (2024). All We Need is Love? Irreconcilable Political Incongruence in Families after the 2019 Social Unrest in Hong Kong. Political Psychology, 45, 643-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12941

  • Youth Research Centre. (2019). Strengthening Intergenerational Understanding (Society and Livelihood, Issue. The Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups. https://yrc.hkfyg.org.hk/2019/12/09/yi048

  • Xiao, C. (2023). A comparative review of communication differences between Chinese and American families in child upbringing. Journal of Linguistics and Communication Studies, 2(3), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.56397/JLCS.2023.09.07

  • Wu, M. Y. (2023). The concept of guan in the Chinese parent-child relationship. In C. C. Yi (Ed.), The psychological well-being of East Asian youth (pp. 29-49). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2022.2081494

  • Whitehead AL, Julious SA, Cooper CL, Campbell MJ. Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016 Jun;25(3):1057-73. doi: 10.1177/0962280215588241. Epub 2015 Jun 19.

    PubMed 26092476

  • Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, Powell BJ, Dorsey CN, Clary AS, Boynton MH, Halko H. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017 Aug 29;12(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3.

    PubMed 28851459

  • Wang YL, Wang YH, Leung DKY, Wong SMY, Ng ZLY, Chan RCL, Chan OLH, Chan WC, Wong GHY, Lum TYS. Peer-supported mindfulness-based intervention for managing depressive symptoms in community-dwelling older adults: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2025 Aug;155:107991. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2025.107991. Epub 2025 Jun 20.

    PubMed 40544956

  • Tsai FJ. The maintaining and improving effect of grandchild care provision on elders' mental health-Evidence from longitudinal study in Taiwan. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016 May-Jun;64:59-65. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2016.01.009. Epub 2016 Jan 16.

    PubMed 26952378

  • Tierney L, Beattie E. Enjoyable, engaging and individualised: A concept analysis of meaningful activity for older adults with dementia. Int J Older People Nurs. 2020 Jun;15(2):e12306. doi: 10.1111/opn.12306. Epub 2020 Feb 5.

    PubMed 32022414

  • The Samaritan Befrienders Hong Kong. (2023). Annual Report for 2023. https://sbhk.org.hk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/ESBHK2023_Annual-Report_low-res.pdf

  • Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80-93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80

  • Smilkstein G. The family APGAR: a proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. J Fam Pract. 1978 Jun;6(6):1231-9. No abstract available.

    PubMed 660126

  • Sánchez-Cazalla, V., & Gutiérrez-Domingo, T. (2025). Impact of intergenerational programmes on older adults for active ageing. A systematic review. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics Plus, 2(3), 100176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aggp.2025.100176

  • Romppel M, Herrmann-Lingen C, Wachter R, Edelmann F, Dungen HD, Pieske B, Grande G. A short form of the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE-6): Development, psychometric properties and validity in an intercultural non-clinical sample and a sample of patients at risk for heart failure. Psychosoc Med. 2013;10:Doc01. doi: 10.3205/psm000091. Epub 2013 Feb 20.

    PubMed 23429426

  • Plys E, Jacobs ML, Allen RS, Arch JJ. Psychological flexibility in older adulthood: a scoping review. Aging Ment Health. 2023 Mar;27(3):453-465. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2022.2036948. Epub 2022 Feb 15.

    PubMed 35168415

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing ReFrame-R in people with Intergenerational Relations, run by The University of Hong Kong at 1 site in Hong Kong.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Perceived communication competence (time frame: Both groups: Baseline, Week 4 (end of training), Week 6 (2 weeks follow-up); Intervention group only: 4 months post-training). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07494071, which also lists 43 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Sep 2026.

AzTrials uses cookies for analytics and advertising. You can accept or reject them; the site works either way. Privacy Policy.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in