Home › Research › Prevention trials
Cognitive interventions for healthy older adults: A systematic meta-review
Vitória Florêncio Velloso, Sofia Latgé-Tovar, Iris Bomilcar, Daniel C. Mograbi. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 2025-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Thirty-nine articles were included, with 21 meta-analyses and 18 qualitative systematic reviews. The total number of reviews was 38 for cognitive training, 4 for cognitive stimulation, and 1 for multicomponent interventions. Most reviews had low or critically low quality. The prevailing evidence supports cognitive training. Continued research into cognitive stimulation and multicomponent protocols is encouraged. Longer follow-ups are important for identifying combined and clinically significant results. Rigorous risk of bias and quality assessment is necessary to enhance the evidence base.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Velloso, V. F., Latgé-Tovar, S., Bomilcar, I., & Mograbi, D. C. (2025). Cognitive interventions for healthy older adults: A systematic meta-review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100538
Vancouver
Velloso VF, Latgé-Tovar S, Bomilcar I, Mograbi DC. Cognitive interventions for healthy older adults: A systematic meta-review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100538. PMID: 39877892.
BibTeX
@article{velloso2025-39877892,
author = {Velloso, Vitória Florêncio and Latgé-Tovar, Sofia and Bomilcar, Iris and Mograbi, Daniel C.},
title = {{Cognitive interventions for healthy older adults: A systematic meta-review}},
journal = {International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100538},
pmid = {39877892},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100538}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Thirty-nine articles were included, with 21 meta-analyses and 18 qualitative systematic reviews.
- The total number of reviews was 38 for cognitive training, 4 for cognitive stimulation, and 1 for multicomponent interventions.
- Most reviews had low or critically low quality.
- The prevailing evidence supports cognitive training.
- Continued research into cognitive stimulation and multicomponent protocols is encouraged.
Why it matters
This meta-review of 39 articles found that most reviews had low or critically low quality, and that the prevailing evidence supports cognitive training for healthy older adults. It encourages continued research into cognitive stimulation and multicomponent protocols and notes that longer follow-ups are important for identifying clinically significant results.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 58/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology: journal h-index 66 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” 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 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| Times cited | 3 / 7 | Cited 19 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 6.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 12.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 19 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Daniel C. Mograbi: h-index 31 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | King's College London: institution h-index 1,348 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 3 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39877892) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 58 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100538
- PubMed: 39877892
- Original source →
- Free full text: International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 15.
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “cognitive-function”
1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.