Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Feasibility and Acceptability of Computerised Cognitive Training of Everyday Cognition in Parkinson's Disease
S J Smith, I McMillan, I Leroi, C L Champ, S Barr, K R McDonald, J P R Dick, E Poliakoff. Parkinson's disease, 2019-07-22
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The findings indicated that participants felt the training was acceptable, enhanced their awareness, and encouraged them to monitor their thinking abilities. The group interview indicated that the training was feasible; participants felt the tasks had potential to improve everyday performance, but more supporting information should be provided to facilitate this transfer. Responses to the questionnaires reflected these findings, indicating improvement for some participants' cognition and quality of life. Objective measures supported the subjective reports; there were improvements in some but not all domains. Performance on the planning and recollection tasks improved over the training period, and the evidence for improvement on the attention task was mixed. This study has found that pragmatic computer-based training with real-life outcomes is both feasible and acceptable and should be evaluated more extensively using controlled methods.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Smith, S. J., McMillan, I., Leroi, I., Champ, C. L., Barr, S., McDonald, K. R., et al. (2019). Feasibility and Acceptability of Computerised Cognitive Training of Everyday Cognition in Parkinson's Disease. Parkinson's disease. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5258493
Vancouver
Smith SJ, McMillan I, Leroi I, Champ CL, Barr S, McDonald KR, et al. Feasibility and Acceptability of Computerised Cognitive Training of Everyday Cognition in Parkinson's Disease. Parkinson's disease. 2019. doi:10.1155/2019/5258493. PMID: 31428303.
BibTeX
@article{smith2019-31428303,
author = {Smith, S J and McMillan, I and Leroi, I and Champ, C L and Barr, S and McDonald, K R and Dick, J P R and Poliakoff, E},
title = {{Feasibility and Acceptability of Computerised Cognitive Training of Everyday Cognition in Parkinson's Disease}},
journal = {Parkinson's disease},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1155/2019/5258493},
pmid = {31428303},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5258493}
}
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 8 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
- The findings indicated that participants felt the training was acceptable, enhanced their awareness, and encouraged them to monitor their thinking abilities.
- The group interview indicated that the training was feasible; participants felt the tasks had potential to improve everyday performance, but more supporting information should be provided to facilitate this transfer.
- Responses to the questionnaires reflected these findings, indicating improvement for some participants' cognition and quality of life.
- Objective measures supported the subjective reports; there were improvements in some but not all domains.
- Performance on the planning and recollection tasks improved over the training period, and the evidence for improvement on the attention task was mixed.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 39/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Parkinson's disease) |
| 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) |
| 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 31428303) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 22 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100. |
| Total | 39 / 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 “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.