Home › Research › Prevention trials
Can brain exercises mitigate cognitive decline? A quasi-experimental evaluation of the StrongerMemory program
Emily S. Ihara, Hyun Kang, Catherine J. Tompkins, Francesca Keesee, Mckenzie Lauber, Gergana N. Hardy, Catherine Magee, Kendall E. Barrett et al.. Educational Gerontology, 2025-07-10
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The StrongerMemory program, a structured intervention involving reading aloud, writing by hand, and completing simple math problems, is designed to stimulate the prefrontal cortex and enhance cognitive functioning. This study addresses a research gap by evaluating a multi-modal cognitive intervention compared to traditional single-domain approaches. It aligns with emerging frameworks emphasizing population-informed, personalized cognitive training. A 12-week quasi-experimental study was conducted with 102 older adults (aged 59+) from three continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) and 25 aging-in-place villages. Pre- and post-intervention cognitive outcomes were assessed using the 5-minute protocol of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment 2.1 (Mini MoCA) and the Memory Functioning Questionnaire (MFQ). ANCOVA controlled for baseline Mini MoCA differences. Weekly check-ins were used to monitor adherence. Mini MoCA scores improved from pretest (12.73 ± 2.1) to posttest (13.26 ± 2.3, p <.0001) with statistically significant recall improvement (3.44 to 3.92, p < .001). One MFQ item measuring perceived memory decline in the last year improved from pre to post (3.72 to 4.03, p < .001). ANCOVA indicated significantly lower post-intervention Mini MoCA scores among CCRC residents compared to those living in the community. Participation in StrongerMemory was associated with both objective and subjective improvement in cognitive functioning, especially for those living in the community. This low-cost, non-pharmacological program offers promise as a scalable intervention for cognitive aging. Differences across living environments suggest that social or contextual influences warrant further investigation.
Key findings
- This study addresses a research gap by evaluating a multi-modal cognitive intervention compared to traditional single-domain approaches.
- Mini MoCA scores improved from pretest (12.73 ± 2.1) to posttest (13.26 ± 2.3, p <.0001) with statistically significant recall improvement (3.44 to 3.92, p < .001).
- ANCOVA indicated significantly lower post-intervention Mini MoCA scores among CCRC residents compared to those living in the community.
- Participation in StrongerMemory was associated with both objective and subjective improvement in cognitive functioning, especially for those living in the community.
- Differences across living environments suggest that social or contextual influences warrant further investigation.
Why it matters
In this 12-week quasi-experimental study of 102 older adults, participation in the StrongerMemory program was associated with improved Mini MoCA scores and recall. The study did not compare against a randomized control, so it cannot establish whether the program prevents or treats Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 31/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 30 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 31 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Educational Gerontology) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Educational Gerontology: journal h-index 86 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 1 / 6 | Cited 0.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 1 / 6 | Cited by 1 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 1 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Harveen Pantleay holds only 5 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | George Mason University: institution h-index 566 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 30 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 31 out of 100. |
| Total | 31 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Ihara, E. S., Kang, H., Tompkins, C. J., Keesee, F., Lauber, M., Hardy, G. N., et al. (2025). Can brain exercises mitigate cognitive decline? A quasi-experimental evaluation of the StrongerMemory program. Educational Gerontology. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2025.2528677
Vancouver
Ihara ES, Kang H, Tompkins CJ, Keesee F, Lauber M, Hardy GN, et al. Can brain exercises mitigate cognitive decline? A quasi-experimental evaluation of the StrongerMemory program. Educational Gerontology. 2025. doi:10.1080/03601277.2025.2528677.
BibTeX
@article{ihara2025-a8dbc983,
author = {Ihara, Emily S. and Kang, Hyun and Tompkins, Catherine J. and Keesee, Francesca and Lauber, Mckenzie and Hardy, Gergana N. and Magee, Catherine and Barrett, Kendall E. and others},
title = {{Can brain exercises mitigate cognitive decline? A quasi-experimental evaluation of the StrongerMemory program}},
journal = {Educational Gerontology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1080/03601277.2025.2528677},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2025.2528677}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.