Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 190

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive Rehabilitation Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Review of Methods to Improve Treatment Engagement and Self-Efficacy

Open access
Choi, Jimmy, Twamley, Elizabeth W.·2013·Neuropsychology Review

Abstract

Cognitive rehabilitation therapies for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) are becoming more readily available to the geriatric population in an attempt to curb the insidious decline in cognitive and functional performance. However, people with AD may have difficulty adhering to these cognitive treatments due to denial of memory deficits, compromised brain systems, cognitive incapacity for self-awareness, general difficulty following through on daily tasks, lack of motivation, hopelessness, and apathy, all of which may be either due to the illness or be secondary to depression. Cognitive rehabilitation training exercises are also labor intensive and, unfortunately, serve as a repeated reminder about the memory impairments and attendant functional consequences. In order for cognitive rehabilitation methods to be effective, patients must be adequately engaged and motivated to not only begin a rehabilitation program but also to remain involved in the intervention until a therapeutic dosage can be attained. We review approaches to cognitive rehabilitation in AD, neuropsychological as well as psychological obstacles to effective treatment in this population, and methods that target adherence to treatment and may therefore be applicable to cognitive rehabilitation therapies for AD. The goal is to stimulate discussion among researchers and clinicians alike on how treatment effects may be mediated by engagement in treatment, and what can be done to enhance patient adherence for cognitive rehabilitation therapies in order to obtain greater cognitive and functional benefits from the treatment itself.

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 · 10.1007/s11065-013-9227-4

Cites

14 of 14 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

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 14 references

Cited by

See all 190

Metadata

Authors
Choi, J., & Twamley, E. W.
Venue
Neuropsychology Review
Published
2013-02-12
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
48-62
ISSN
  • 1040-7308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6660
OpenAlex
W2011209707
Cited by
190
References
14
FWCI
7.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cognitive Rehabilitation Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Review of Methods to Improve Treatment Engagement and Self-Efficacy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11065-013-9227-4
The paper
Choi, J., & Twamley, E. W. (2013). Cognitive Rehabilitation Therapies for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Review of Methods to Improve Treatment Engagement and Self-Efficacy. Neuropsychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-013-9227-4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.