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.

74/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Objectives • To assess effects of CT on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To compare effects of CT with those of other non-pharmacological interventions, including cognitive stimulation or rehabilitation, for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To identify and explore factors related to intervention and trial design that may be associated with the efficacy of CT for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that described interventions for people with mild to moderate dementia and compared CT versus a control or alternative intervention. Main results The 33 included trials were published between 1988 and 2018 and were conducted in 12 countries; most were unregistered, parallel-group, single-site RCTs, with samples ranging from 12 to 653 participants. Relative to a control condition, we found moderate-quality evidence showing a small to moderate effect of CT on our first primary outcome, composite measure of global cognition at end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 0.62), and high-quality evidence showing a moderate effect on the secondary outcome of verbal semantic fluency (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81) at end of treatment, with these gains retained in the medium term (3 to 12 months post treatment). In relation to many other outcomes, including our second primary outcome of clinical disease severity in the medium term, the quality of evidence was very low, so we were unable to determine whether CT was associated with any meaningful gains.When compared with an alternative treatment, we found that CT may have little to no effect on our first primary outcome of global cognition at end of treatment (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.64), but the quality of evidence was low. We found moderate-quality evidence showing that CT was associated with improved mood of the caregiver at end of treatment, but this was based on a single trial. The quality of evidence in relation to many other outcomes at end of treatment and in the medium term was too low for us to determine whether CT was associated with any gains, but we are moderately confident that CT did not lead to any gains in mood, behavioural and psychological symptoms, or capacity to perform activities of daily living. Authors' conclusions Relative to a control intervention, but not t

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

APA 7th

Bahar-Fuchs, A., Martyr, A., Goh, A. M., Sabates, J., & Clare, L. (2019). Cognitive training for people with mild to moderate dementia. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2

Vancouver

Bahar-Fuchs A, Martyr A, Goh AM, Sabates J, Clare L. Cognitive training for people with mild to moderate dementia. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2019. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2. PMID: 30909318.

BibTeX

@article{baharfuchs2019-30909318,
  author  = {Bahar-Fuchs, A. and Martyr, A. and Goh, A. M. and Sabates, J. and Clare, L.},
  title   = {{Cognitive training for people with mild to moderate dementia}},
  journal = {The Cochrane database of systematic reviews},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2},
  pmid    = {30909318},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013069.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

Objectives • To assess effects of CT on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To compare effects of CT with those of other non-pharmacological interventions, including cognitive stimulation or rehabilitation, for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To identify and explore factors related to intervention and trial design that may be associated with the efficacy of CT for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.
Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that described interventions for people with mild to moderate dementia and compared CT versus a control or alternative intervention.
Main results The 33 included trials were published between 1988 and 2018 and were conducted in 12 countries; most were unregistered, parallel-group, single-site RCTs, with samples ranging from 12 to 653 participants.
Relative to a control condition, we found moderate-quality evidence showing a small to moderate effect of CT on our first primary outcome, composite measure of global cognition at end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 0.62), and high-quality evidence showing a moderate effect on the secondary outcome of verbal semantic fluency (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81) at end of treatment, with these gains retained in the medium term (3 to 12 months post treatment).
In relation to many other outcomes, including our second primary outcome of clinical disease severity in the medium term, the quality of evidence was very low, so we were unable to determine whether CT was associated with any meaningful gains.When compared with an alternative treatment, we found that CT may have little to no effect on our first primary outcome of global cognition at end of treatment (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.64), but the quality of evidence was low.

Why it matters

This review of 33 trials found that cognitive training produced small to moderate improvements in global cognition and verbal fluency for people with mild to moderate dementia at end of treatment. These gains were retained, but the evidence does not show that cognitive training cures or prevents Alzheimer's disease.

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

Study details

Study designmeta-analysis
Participants653
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 74/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for effect reported 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	2 / 5	2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	653 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 315 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	35.0 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019
Impact for its field and year	5 / 6	Cited 23.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	3 / 6	Cited by 18 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 124 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	3 / 4	Last-listed author Linda Clare: h-index 88 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	The University of Melbourne: institution h-index 1,342 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30909318)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	74 / 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 34.

Later studies that cite this one

18 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 →