Home › Research › Prevention trials
Effects of computerised cognitive training on cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis
Hu M, Wu X, Shu X, Hu H, Chen Q, Peng L, Feng H.. Journal of neurology, 2019-10-24
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Computerised cognitive training (CCT) has been shown to enhance cognitive function in elderly individuals with cognitive deterioration, but evidence is controversial. Additionally, whether specific CCT is most effective and which stages of cognitive impairment benefit most is unclear. Methods We systematically searched nine medical and technological databases to collect randomized controlled trials related to CCT primarily conducted in patients with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Results We identified 12 studies in patients with SCD and MCI. Pooled analysis showed that CCT could significantly improve cognitive function (g = 0.518, p = 0.000), especially related to memory. In terms of different types of cognitive training, specific CCT was more efficacious than non-specific CCT (g = 0.381, p = 0.007) or placebo (g = 0.734, p = 0.000) but not traditional CT (p = 0.628). In terms of stages of cognitive deterioration, the effect of CCT on SCD (g = 0.926, p = 0.002) was almost double that of its effect on MCI (g = 0.502, p = 0.000). Conclusion CCT was most effective in cognitive rehabilitation, particularly in the subdomain of memory. Early intervention in SCD is better.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hu, M., Wu, X., Shu, X., Hu, H., Chen, Q., Peng, L., et al. (2021). Effects of computerised cognitive training on cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis. Journal of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-019-09522-7
Vancouver
Hu M, Wu X, Shu X, Hu H, Chen Q, Peng L, et al. Effects of computerised cognitive training on cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis. Journal of neurology. 2021. doi:10.1007/s00415-019-09522-7. PMID: 31650255.
BibTeX
@article{hu2021-31650255,
author = {Hu, M. and Wu, X. and Shu, X. and Hu, H. and Chen, Q. and Peng, L. and Feng, H.},
title = {{Effects of computerised cognitive training on cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis}},
journal = {Journal of neurology},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1007/s00415-019-09522-7},
pmid = {31650255},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-019-09522-7}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results We identified 12 studies in patients with SCD and MCI.
- Pooled analysis showed that CCT could significantly improve cognitive function (g = 0.518, p = 0.000), especially related to memory.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 67/100
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. 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 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies (from PubMed type “Meta-Analysis”) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 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 | — / 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 31650255) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 39 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100. |
| Total | 67 / 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.