Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Exergaming for dementia and mild cognitive impairment
Voinescu A, Papaioannou T, Petrini K, Stanton Fraser D.. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2024-09-25
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Dementia and mild cognitive impairment are significant contributors to disability and dependency in older adults. Main results We included 11 studies published between 2014 and 2023. We have only low or very low certainty about all the results presented below. Effects of exergaming interventions for people with dementia Compared to a control group Exergaming may improve global cognitive functioning at the end of treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 1.47, 95% 1.04 to 1.90; 2 studies, 113 participants). Compared to an alternative treatment group At the end of treatment, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of exergaming on global physical functioning (SMD 0.14, 95% -0.30 to 0.58; 2 studies, 85 participants) or global cognitive functioning (SMD 0.11, 95% -0.33 to 0.55; 2 studies, 85 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about adverse effects of exergaming compared with alternative treatment (RR 7.50, 95% CI 0.41 to 136.52; 2 studies, 2/85 participants). Effects of exergaming interventions for people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) Compared to a control group Exergaming may improve global cognitive functioning at the end of treatment for people with MCI, but the evidence is very uncertain, (SMD 0.79, 95% 0.05 to 1.53; 2 studies, 34 participants). Compared to an alternative treatment group The evidence is very uncertain about global physical functioning at the end of treatment. For global cognitive functioning, we included four studies (n = 235 participants), but due to considerable heterogeneity (I² = 96%), we could not pool results. Authors' conclusions Overall, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of exergaming on global physical and cognitive functioning, and ADL. The potential benefit is observed only when exergaming is compared with a control intervention (e.g. usual care, listening to music, health education), and not when compared with an alternative treatment with a specific effect, such as physical activity (e.g. standing and sitting exercises or cycling).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Voinescu, A., Papaioannou, T., Petrini, K., & Stanton Fraser, D. (2024). Exergaming for dementia and mild cognitive impairment. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013853.pub2
Vancouver
Voinescu A, Papaioannou T, Petrini K, Stanton Fraser D. Exergaming for dementia and mild cognitive impairment. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2024. doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013853.pub2. PMID: 39319863.
BibTeX
@article{voinescu2024-39319863,
author = {Voinescu, A. and Papaioannou, T. and Petrini, K. and Stanton Fraser, D.},
title = {{Exergaming for dementia and mild cognitive impairment}},
journal = {The Cochrane database of systematic reviews},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1002/14651858.cd013853.pub2},
pmid = {39319863},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013853.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
- Background Dementia and mild cognitive impairment are significant contributors to disability and dependency in older adults.
- Main results We included 11 studies published between 2014 and 2023.
- We have only low or very low certainty about all the results presented below.
- Effects of exergaming interventions for people with dementia Compared to a control group Exergaming may improve global cognitive functioning at the end of treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (SMD 1.47, 95% 1.04 to 1.90; 2 studies, 113 participants).
- Compared to an alternative treatment group At the end of treatment, the evidence is very uncertain about the effects of exergaming on global physical functioning (SMD 0.14, 95% -0.30 to 0.58; 2 studies, 85 participants) or global cognitive functioning (SMD 0.11, 95% -0.33 to 0.55; 2 studies, 85 participants).
Study details
- Participants67
- Effect sizeRR 7.50
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 88/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. 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 51 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 88 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Cochrane database of systematic reviews) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 67 participants |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| 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 | — / 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 39319863) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 51 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 51 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 88 out of 100. |
| Total | 88 / 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 Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “meta-analysis”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “meta-analysis”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.