CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,140Traumatic Brain Injury ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Evidence-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation: Updated Review of the Literature From 1998 Through 2002

Cicerone, Keith D., Dahlberg, Cynthia, Malec, James F., Langenbahn, Donna M., Felicetti, Thomas, Kneipp, Sally, Ellmo, Wendy, Kalmar, Kathleen +5 more·2005·Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
DOI 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.024
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To update the previous evidence-based recommendations of the Brain Injury Interdisciplinary Special Interest Group of the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine for cognitive rehabilitation of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke, based on a systematic review of the literature from 1998 through 2002.Data sources PubMed and Infotrieve literature searches were conducted using the terms attention, awareness, cognition, communication, executive, language, memory, perception, problem solving, and reasoning combined with each of the terms rehabilitation, remediation, and training. Reference lists from identified articles were reviewed and a bibliography listing 312 articles was compiled.Study selection One hundred eighteen articles were initially selected for inclusion. Thirty-one studies were excluded after detailed review. Excluded articles included 14 studies without data, 6 duplicate publications or follow-up studies, 5 nontreatment studies, 4 reviews, and 2 case studies involving diagnoses other than TBI or stroke.Data extraction Articles were assigned to 1 of 7 categories reflecting the primary area of intervention: attention; visual perception; apraxia; language and communication; memory; executive functioning, problem solving and awareness; and comprehensive-holistic cognitive rehabilitation. Articles were abstracted and levels of evidence determined using specific criteria.Data synthesis Of the 87 studies evaluated, 17 were rated as class I, 8 as class II, and 62 as class III. Evidence within each area of intervention was synthesized and recommendations for practice standards, practice guidelines, and practice options were made.Conclusions There is substantial evidence to support cognitive-linguistic therapies for people with language deficits after left hemisphere stroke. New evidence supports training for apraxia after left hemisphere stroke. The evidence supports visuospatial rehabilitation for deficits associated with visual neglect after right hemisphere stroke. There is substantial evidence to support cognitive rehabilitation for people with TBI, including strategy training for mild memory impairment, strategy training for postacute attention deficits, and interventions for functional communication deficits. The overall analysis of 47 treatment comparisons, based on class I studies included in the current and previous review, reveals a differential benefit in favor of cognitive rehabilitation in 37 of 47 (78.7%) comparisons, with no comparison demonstrating a benefit in favor of the alternative treatment condition. Future research should move beyond the simple question of whether cognitive rehabilitation is effective, and examine the therapy factors and patient characteristics that optimize the clinical outcomes of cognitive rehabilitation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.024

Cites

126 of 126 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Current treatment options include rehabilitation, cognitive remediation, physical exercise, cognitive enhancing medication, and various brain stimulation techniques.

    “Current treatment options include rehabilitation, cognitive remediation, physical exercise, cognitive enhancing medication, and various brain stimulation techniques (Cicerone et al., 2005; Leroi, McDonald, Pantula, & Harbishettar, 2012; Wallace, Ballard, Pouzet, Riedel, & Wettstein, 2011), yet treatment effects vary and effect sizes (ES) are generally low.”

    From Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation on cognitive functioning in brain disorders: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Cicerone et al., 2005

  • Treatment effects of current options vary and effect sizes are generally low.

    “Current treatment options include rehabilitation, cognitive remediation, physical exercise, cognitive enhancing medication, and various brain stimulation techniques (Cicerone et al., 2005; Leroi, McDonald, Pantula, & Harbishettar, 2012; Wallace, Ballard, Pouzet, Riedel, & Wettstein, 2011), yet treatment effects vary and effect sizes (ES) are generally low.”

    From Efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation on cognitive functioning in brain disorders: a meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Cicerone et al., 2005

  • Cognitive rehabilitation techniques have been shown to be effective and can be used through several different cognitive deficits and etiologies.

    “The spread of cognitive rehabilitation techniques is indispensable, as it has been showed to be effective and can be used through several different cognitive deficits and etiologies [186].”

    From Cognitive decline following acute viral infections: literature review and projections for post-COVID-19 (2022) · cites this paper as [186]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cicerone, K. D., Dahlberg, C., Malec, J. F., Langenbahn, D. M., Felicetti, T., Kneipp, S., Ellmo, W., Kalmar, K., Giacino, J. T., Harley, J. P., Laatsch, L., Morse, P. A., & Catanese, J.
Affiliations
  • John F. Kennedy Medical Center (US)
  • Craig Hospital (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Rusk Rehabilitation (US)
  • Marianjoy Rehabilitation Hospital (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
ORCID
Venue
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-08
Volume
86
Issue
8
Pages
1681-1692
ISSN
0003-9993 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.apmr.2005.03.024
OpenAlex
W2917311897
Cited by
1,140
References
126
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 66 · 2014: 77 · 2013: 76 · 2012: 96
FWCI
5.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
cognitive rehabilitation, traumatic brain injury, stroke, attention, memory impairment, executive function, apraxia, visual neglect, strategy training, evidence-based recommendations, treatment comparison
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Brain Injuries, Cognition Disorders, Humans, Evidence-Based Medicine, Stroke

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