Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Examining the effects of computerised cognitive training on levels of executive function in adults with Down syndrome
McGlinchey E, McCarron M, Holland A, McCallion P.. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2019-05-06
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) are at much greater risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, and one of the early clinical symptoms of Alzheimer's disease is executive dysfunction. In the general population, cognitive training has shown some promising results in relation to maintaining or improving cognitive processes. There is currently a gap in the literature in relation to cognitive training for adults with DS. Methods A quasi-experimental mixed factorial design with partial crossover was used involving an 8-week intervention period using a brain training programme. Participants were matched on age and then randomly assigned to either the intervention group or the delayed intervention group. Forty adults with DS, aged between 30 and 49 and with a mild or moderate level of intellectual disability, participated in the study. All participants completed baseline measures of executive function, using both neuropsychological assessments and an informant-rated measure of behavioural executive function. The intervention group first completed the training and then the delayed intervention group. Executive function assessments were repeated for both groups following the training. Results The study aimed to examine whether a cognitive training programme could have an effect on levels of executive function. While conclusions are limited owing to small sample size, improvement was seen in neuropsychological assessments of executive function following cognitive training. Positive effects reflected in everyday behaviours were not as promising. Conclusions This study showed that, while it has not been previously an area of focus, individuals with DS can complete a computerised cognitive training programme. Furthermore, the results were promising with significant improvements found in neuropsychological assessments of executive function. These findings need further investigation with a larger sample size and would benefit from the use of a brain imaging component to strengthen the findings.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
McGlinchey, E., McCarron, M., Holland, A., & McCallion, P. (2019). Examining the effects of computerised cognitive training on levels of executive function in adults with Down syndrome. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12626
Vancouver
McGlinchey E, McCarron M, Holland A, McCallion P. Examining the effects of computerised cognitive training on levels of executive function in adults with Down syndrome. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. 2019. doi:10.1111/jir.12626. PMID: 31062455.
BibTeX
@article{mcglinchey2019-31062455,
author = {McGlinchey, E. and McCarron, M. and Holland, A. and McCallion, P.},
title = {{Examining the effects of computerised cognitive training on levels of executive function in adults with Down syndrome}},
journal = {Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1111/jir.12626},
pmid = {31062455},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12626}
}
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
- In the general population, cognitive training has shown some promising results in relation to maintaining or improving cognitive processes.
- Results The study aimed to examine whether a cognitive training programme could have an effect on levels of executive function.
- Conclusions This study showed that, while it has not been previously an area of focus, individuals with DS can complete a computerised cognitive training programme.
- Furthermore, the results were promising with significant improvements found in neuropsychological assessments of executive function.
- These findings need further investigation with a larger sample size and would benefit from the use of a brain imaging component to strengthen the findings.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomized (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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31062455) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “cognitive-training”
6 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-training”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 6 tagged studies.