Home › Research › Prevention trials
Cognitive training for persons with mild cognitive impairment
Belleville S.. International psychogeriatrics, 2007-10-25
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Recent randomized control trials and meta-analyses of experimental studies indicate positive effects of non-pharmacological cognitive training on the cognitive function of healthy older adults. Furthermore, a large-scale randomized control trial with older adults, independent at entry, indicated that training delayed their cognitive and functional decline over a five-year follow-up. This supports cognitive training as a potentially efficient method to postpone cognitive decline in persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Most of the research on the effect of cognitive training in MCI has reported increased performance following training on objective measures of memory whereas a minority reported no effect of training on objective cognitive measures. Interestingly, some of the studies that reported a positive effect of cognitive training in persons with MCI have observed large to moderate effect size. However, all of these studies have limited power and few have used long-term follow-ups or functional impact measures. Overall, this review highlights a need for a well-controlled randomized trial to assess the efficacy of cognitive training in MCI. It also raises a number of unresolved issues including proper outcome measures, issues of generalization and choice of intervention format.
Key findings
- Furthermore, a large-scale randomized control trial with older adults, independent at entry, indicated that training delayed their cognitive and functional decline over a five-year follow-up.
- Overall, this review highlights a need for a well-controlled randomized trial to assess the efficacy of cognitive training in MCI.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designrandomized controlled trial
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International psychogeriatrics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial |
| 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 | 2008 — 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 | 1 / 2 | Randomised (as stated in the record) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 17958927) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Belleville, S. (2008). Cognitive training for persons with mild cognitive impairment. International psychogeriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s104161020700631x
Vancouver
Belleville S. Cognitive training for persons with mild cognitive impairment. International psychogeriatrics. 2008. doi:10.1017/s104161020700631x. PMID: 17958927.
BibTeX
@article{belleville2008-17958927,
author = {Belleville, S.},
title = {{Cognitive training for persons with mild cognitive impairment}},
journal = {International psychogeriatrics},
year = {2008},
doi = {10.1017/s104161020700631x},
pmid = {17958927},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s104161020700631x}
}
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “assessment”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assessment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.