CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 342Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryCognitive Abilities and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 231 of the 234 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive training for people with mild to moderate dementia

Open access
Bahar-Fuchs, Alex, Martyr, Anthony, Goh, Anita MY, Sabates, Julieta, Clare, Linda·2019·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2PMC PMC6433473
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment, a defining feature of dementia, plays an important role in the compromised functional independence that characterises the condition. Cognitive training (CT) is an approach that uses guided practice on structured tasks with the direct aim of improving or maintaining cognitive abilities. OBJECTIVES: • To assess effects of CT on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To compare effects of CT with those of other non-pharmacological interventions, including cognitive stimulation or rehabilitation, for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers.• To identify and explore factors related to intervention and trial design that may be associated with the efficacy of CT for people with mild to moderate dementia and their caregivers. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialised Register, on 5 July 2018. ALOIS contains records of clinical trials identified through monthly searches of several major healthcare databases and numerous trial registries and grey literature sources. In addition to this, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization's trials portal, ICTRP, to ensure that searches were comprehensive and up-to-date. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that described interventions for people with mild to moderate dementia and compared CT versus a control or alternative intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted relevant data from published manuscripts and through contact with trial authors if required. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We divided comparison conditions into active or passive control conditions and alternative treatments. We used a large number of measures and data to evaluate 19 outcomes at end of treatment, as well as 16 outcomes at follow-up in the medium term; we pooled this information in meta-analyses. We calculated pooled estimates of treatment effect using a random-effects model, and we estimated statistical heterogeneity using a standard Chi² statistic. We graded the evidence using GradePro. MAIN RESULTS: The 33 included trials were published between 1988 and 2018 and were conducted in 12 countries; most were unregistered, parallel-group, single-site RCTs, with samples ranging from 12 to 653 participants. Interventions were between two and 104 weeks long. We classified most experimental interventions as 'straight CT', but we classified some as 'augmented CT', and about two-thirds as multi-domain interventions. Researchers investigated 18 passive and 13 active control conditions, along with 15 alternative treatment conditions, including occupational therapy, mindfulness, reminiscence therapy, and others.The methodological quality of studies varied, but we rated nearly all studies as having high or unclear risk of selection bias due to lack of allocation concealment, and high or unclear risk of performance bias due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel.We used data from 32 studies in the meta-analysis of at least one outcome. Relative to a control condition, we found moderate-quality evidence showing a small to moderate effect of CT on our first primary outcome, composite measure of global cognition at end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 0.62), and high-quality evidence showing a moderate effect on the secondary outcome of verbal semantic fluency (SMD 0.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.81) at end of treatment, with these gains retained in the medium term (3 to 12 months post treatment). In relation to many other outcomes, including our second primary outcome of clinical disease severity in the medium term, the quality of evidence was very low, so we were unable to determine whether CT was associated with any meaningful gains.When compared with an alternative treatment, we found that CT may have little to no effect on our first primary outcome of global cognition at end of treatment (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.64), but the quality of evidence was low. No evidence was available to assess our second primary outcome of clinical disease severity in the medium term. We found moderate-quality evidence showing that CT was associated with improved mood of the caregiver at end of treatment, but this was based on a single trial. The quality of evidence in relation to many other outcomes at end of treatment and in the medium term was too low for us to determine whether CT was associated with any gains, but we are moderately confident that CT did not lead to any gains in mood, behavioural and psychological symptoms, or capacity to perform activities of daily living. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Relative to a control intervention, but not to a variety of alternative treatments, CT is probably associated with small to mo

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2

Cites

231 of 231 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 234 references

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Amieva, 2013, ETNA3, a clinical randomized study assessing 3 cognitive-oriented therapies in Alzheimer's disease, Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging, 169, 752
  2. Barban F Annicchiarico R Perri R Fadda L Carlesimo GA Pantelopoulos S Randomized clinical trial of a computer-based cognitive treatment for healthy elderly, clinical and preclincal Alzheimer's disease. The SOCIABLE project Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 2012
  3. Vreese, 1999, Ecological impact of combined cognitive training programs (CTP) and drug treatment (ChE-I) in AD, International Psychogeriatric, 11 Suppl, S187
  4. Vreese, 1998, Effect size of a three-month drug treatment in AD when combined with individual cognitive retraining: preliminary results of a pilot study, European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 248, 41
  5. Kawashima R Cognitive training 27th International Conference of Alzheimer's Disease International 2012
  6. Hernández, 2014, Effects of a neuropsychology program based on mindfulness on Alzheimer's disease: randomized double-blind clinical study, Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 49, 165
  7. Alimova, 1990, Drug-free stimulation of memory in senile patients with initial vascular dementia [Russian], Zhurnal Nevropatologii i Psikhiatrii imeni S S Korsakova, 90, 125
  8. Bernhardt, 2001, Influence of a memory training program on attention and memory performance of patients with dementia [German], Zeitschrift fuer Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 35, 821
  9. Choi, 2012, Self-efficacy for cognitive remediation in Alzheimer's disease [abstract], Alzheimer's & Dementia: Journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 8, P235
  10. Faggian, 2007, An intervention protocol on cognitive abilities for subjects with severe cognitive impairment, Giornale Di, 55, 134
  11. Fernandez-Calvo, 2010, The effect of an individual or group intervention format in cognitive stimulation of patients with Alzheimer's disease, Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica, 15, 115
  12. Israel, 1987, Ginkgo biloba extract and memory training programs - comparative assessment on elderly outpatients, Psychologie Médicale, 19, 1431
  13. Kim, 2005, Effectiveness of cognitive training based on virtual reality for the elderly [Korean], Journal of Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine, 29, 424
  14. Pietila, 2017, Multi-methodological rehabilitation with emphasis on cognitive training alleviates Alzheimer patients' mood symptoms and supports coping among family members, Psykologia, 52, 356
  15. Poptsi, 2017, Longitudinal cognitive training program in people with mild Alzheimer's disease: a randomized controlled trial, Hellenic Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 20, 233
  16. Quintana Hernandez, 2015, Mindfulness-based stimulation in advanced Alzheimer's disease: a comparative, non-inferiority, clinical pilot study, Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 50, 168
  17. Yun, 2008, Effects of playing musical instruments for the purpose of cognitive training on cognitive functioning of dementia patients [Korean], Korean Journal of Music Therapy, 10, 1598
  18. Ben-Yishay, 1978, A modular approach to optimizing orientation, psychomotor alertness, and purposive behavior in severe head trauma patients, Rehabilitation Monograph, 59, 63
  19. Clare, 2001, Cognitive rehabilitation interventions to improve memory functioning in early-stage Alzheimer'sdisease and vascular dementia, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 10.1002/14651858.CD003260.pub2 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Vreese, 1998, Effect size of a three-month drug treatment in AD when combined with individual cognitive retraining: preliminary results of a pilot study, European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 248, 41
  21. Vreese, 1999, Ecological impact of combined cognitive training programs (CTP) and drug treatment (ChE-I) in AD, International Psychogeriatrics, 11 Suppl, S91
  22. Deeks, 2017. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook, Chapter 9. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analysis
  23. Diller, 1974, Studies in Cognition and Rehabilitation in Hemiplegia
  24. Akl, Updated October 2013, Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. Updated October 2013.
  25. Higgins JPT Altman DG Sterne JA (editors) Chapter 8. Assessing risk of bias in included studies Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook. 2017
  26. Corbeil, 1999, Intervention effects on dementia caregiving interaction: a stress-adaptation modeling approach, Journal of Aging and Health, 11, 79, 10.1177/089826439901100105 · DOI
  27. Reeves, 2011, Chapter 13. Including non-randomized studies
  28. Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5) 2014
  29. Spreen, 1998, A compendium of neuropsychologial tests
  30. World Health Organization, 1992, The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders: Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines
  31. Zanetti, 1994, Is procedural memory stimulation effective in Alzheimer's disease?, International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 9, 1006

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Bahar-Fuchs, A., Martyr, A., Goh, A. M., Sabates, J., & Clare, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Melbourne; Academic Unit for Psychiatry of Old Age, Department of Psychiatry; 34-54 Poplar Road Parkville Melbourne Victoria Australia 3052
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
ORCID
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-03-25
Volume
2019
Issue
3
Pages
CD013069-CD013069
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
DOI
10.1002/14651858.cd013069.pub2
PMC
PMC6433473
OpenAlex
W2815156057
Cited by
342
References
234
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 11
FWCI
6.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Alzheimer's Association
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0616-10088)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
cognitive training, mild to moderate dementia, cognitive stimulation, cognitive rehabilitation, non-pharmacological treatment, caregivers, caregiver burden, functional independence, cognitive impairment, multidomain intervention, intervention efficacy
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Dementia, Humans, Middle Aged, Task Performance and Analysis, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review