This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

68/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Overall estimates of treatment effect were calculated using a fixed-effect model, and statistical heterogeneity was measured using a standard Chi(2) statistic. Main results Cognitive training was not associated with positive or negative effects in relation to any reported outcomes. The overall quality of the trials was low to moderate. The single RCT of cognitive rehabilitation found promising results in relation to a number of participant and caregiver outcomes, and was generally of high quality. However, there is still no indication of any significant benefit derived from cognitive training. Trial reports indicate that some gains resulting from intervention may not be captured adequately by available standardised outcome measures. The results of the single RCT of cognitive rehabilitation show promise but are preliminary in nature.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Bahar-Fuchs, A., Clare, L., & Woods, B. (2013). Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003260.pub2

Vancouver

Bahar-Fuchs A, Clare L, Woods B. Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2013. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003260.pub2. PMID: 23740535.

BibTeX

@article{baharfuchs2013-23740535,
  author  = {Bahar-Fuchs, A. and Clare, L. and Woods, B.},
  title   = {{Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia}},
  journal = {The Cochrane database of systematic reviews},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1002/14651858.cd003260.pub2},
  pmid    = {23740535},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003260.pub2}
}

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

Overall estimates of treatment effect were calculated using a fixed-effect model, and statistical heterogeneity was measured using a standard Chi(2) statistic.
Main results Cognitive training was not associated with positive or negative effects in relation to any reported outcomes.
The overall quality of the trials was low to moderate.
The single RCT of cognitive rehabilitation found promising results in relation to a number of participant and caregiver outcomes, and was generally of high quality.
However, there is still no indication of any significant benefit derived from cognitive training.

Why it matters

This review found that cognitive training was not associated with any positive or negative effects on the outcomes reported, and the overall quality of the trials was low to moderate. A single trial of cognitive rehabilitation showed promising results, but the authors describe these as preliminary.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →

Study details

Study designmeta-analysis
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 68/100

Published in a leading specialty 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	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Cochrane database of systematic reviews)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: journal h-index 468 (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	1 / 5	2013 — within 20 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	6 / 7	Cited 504 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	33.6 citations a year over 15 year(s) since 2013
Impact for its field and year	5 / 6	Cited 23.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	3 / 6	Cited by 15 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 94 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Bob T. Woods: h-index 85 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Australian National University: institution h-index 1,088 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23740535)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	68 / 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).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 25.

Later studies that cite this one

15 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.

Related studies in Caregiving

Also tagged “examination”

840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “examination”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →