Home › Research › Prevention trials
Development and evaluation of home-based speed-of-processing training for older adults
Wadley VG, Benz RL, Ball KK, Roenker DL, Edwards JD, Vance DE.. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2006-06-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objectives To develop technical parameters for a videotape-based speed-of-processing training protocol, to evaluate the feasibility of self-administration (experiment 1), and to evaluate the protocol's effectiveness (experiment 2). Design A feasibility study (experiment 1) and a pre-post, 4-arm, nonrandomized controlled trial (experiment 2). Setting University research center. Participants A population-based sample (37 men, 47 women; age range, 65-94y) (experiment 1). A population-based sample (age > or =65y) with no prior exposure to the Useful Field of View assessment or speed-of-processing training, no dementia or life-limiting illness, a Mini-Mental State Examination score of greater than 24, corrected far visual acuity of greater than or equal to 20/40, contrast sensitivity of greater than or equal to 1.50 log(10), and deficient processing speed (experiment 2). For experiment 2, 8 of 189 eligible people declined to participate. The final sample for this experiment included 100 men and 81 women (age range, 65-91y). Interventions Eight to ten 1-hour cognitive training sessions. Main outcome measure Posttraining gains in processing speed. Results Self-administration was feasible. Subjects who underwent home-based training improved their processing speed significantly more than either control group (F(3,146)=16.16, P<.001). Their gains were 74% as great as the gains of those who underwent trainer-facilitated speed-of-processing training. Conclusions People can improve their processing speed at home using readily available technology. Future research should explore the relation of these improvements to driving performance.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wadley, V. G., Benz, R. L., Ball, K. K., Roenker, D. L., Edwards, J. D., & Vance, D. E. (2006). Development and evaluation of home-based speed-of-processing training for older adults. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2006.02.027
Vancouver
Wadley VG, Benz RL, Ball KK, Roenker DL, Edwards JD, Vance DE. Development and evaluation of home-based speed-of-processing training for older adults. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2006.02.027. PMID: 16731209.
BibTeX
@article{wadley2006-16731209,
author = {Wadley, V. G. and Benz, R. L. and Ball, K. K. and Roenker, D. L. and Edwards, J. D. and Vance, D. E.},
title = {{Development and evaluation of home-based speed-of-processing training for older adults}},
journal = {Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation},
year = {2006},
doi = {10.1016/j.apmr.2006.02.027},
pmid = {16731209},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2006.02.027}
}
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
- Results Self-administration was feasible.
- Subjects who underwent home-based training improved their processing speed significantly more than either control group (F(3,146)=16.16, P<.001).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Participants100
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded 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 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 100 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 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 16731209) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 26 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 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.
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.