Cited by 130Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and Memory

Older adults improve on everyday tasks after working memory training and neurostimulation

Open access
Stephens, Jaclyn A., Berryhill, Marian E.·2016·Brain Stimulation

Abstract

Background Aging is associated with decline in executive function (EF), upper-level cognitive abilities such as planning, problem solving, and working memory (WM). This decline is associated with age-related volume loss and reduced functional connectivity in the frontal lobes. Cognitive training interventions aim to counter these losses, but often fail to elicit benefits beyond improvements on trained tasks. Recent interventions pairing WM training with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) have improved WM and elicited transfer to untrained EF tasks. Limitations in previous work include exclusive use of laboratory-based computer training and testing and poor characterization of the mechanism(s) of durable tDCS-linked change. Objective/hypothesis To determine if tDCS-linked WM training improves performance on ecologically valid transfer measures administered in participants' homes. To explore intervention-based changes using neuroimaging (fNIRS) and genotyping (COMT val158met). Methods 90 healthy older adult participants completed 5 sessions of WM training paired with tDCS (Sham, 1 mA tDCS, 2 mA tDCS; 15 min). At follow-up, we assessed performance change on laboratory-based and ecologically valid tasks. Results All participants showed improvement on trained tasks. Importantly, 2 mA of tDCS induced significantly greater far transfer gains after 1 month without contact. Gains were observed on standard far transfer tasks along with ecologically valid far transfer tasks, and stimulation was well tolerated by all participants. FNIRS and genotyping results were less conclusive, but provide promising avenues for future research initiatives. Conclusion These findings highlight the translational value for tDCS-based interventions in healthy older adults interested in maintaining cognitive function.

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 · 10.1016/j.brs.2016.04.001

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Prior evidence shows enhanced cognitive performance in domains of working memory and episodic memory and evidence of transfer effects following active stimulation with cognitive training in older adults.

    “This is surprising given prior evidence of enhanced cognitive performance in domains of working memory and episodic memory and evidence of transfer effects following active stimulation with cognitive training in older adults [33–36, 46, 47].”

    From Primary outcome from the augmenting cognitive training in older adults study (ACT): A tDCS and cognitive training randomized clinical trial (2023) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that older adults improved on trained working-memory tasks and that the active 2 mA stimulation group performed better on far-transfer tasks. The Study Design describes working-memory and transfer measures, but our copy does not report an episodic-memory benefit. It also says trained-task improvement occurred regardless of stimulation group. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a sample of 90 healthy older adults, individuals who received 2mA of stimulation combined with working memory training improved on working memory, processing speed, cognitive flexibility, arithmetic, and functional tasks after one month without contact.

    “For instance, in a sample of 90 healthy older adults, individuals who received 2mA of stimulation combined with working memory training improved on working memory, processing speed, cognitive flexibility, arithmetic, and functional tasks after one month without contact [35].”

    From Primary outcome from the augmenting cognitive training in older adults study (ACT): A tDCS and cognitive training randomized clinical trial (2023) · cites this paper as [35]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Combining tDCS with cognitive training has demonstrated additive effects on cognitive and functional abilities in younger and older adults.

    “Combining tDCS with cognitive training has demonstrated additive effects on cognitive and functional abilities in younger [30–32] and older adults [33–36].”
  • In a separate study, those who received active tDCS demonstrated greater gains on far transfer and functional tasks (e.g., scheduling an appointment).

    “In a separate study, those who received active tDCS demonstrated greater gains on far transfer and functional tasks (e.g., scheduling an appointment) [35].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [2]Pfefferbaum A Sullivan EV Hedehus M Lim KO Adalsteinsson E Moseley M Age-related decline in brain white matter anisotropy measured with spatially corrected echo-planar diffusion tensor imaging Magn Reson Med 2000 44 2 259 268 10918325
  2. [33]Toglia J Weekly Calendar Planning Activity: A Performance Test of Executive Function 2015 AOTA Press 176
  3. [34]Unsworth CA Pallant JF Russell KJ Odell M Driver Off-Road Assessment Battery 2011 American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA) Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stephens, J. A., & Berryhill, M. E.
Affiliations
University of Nevada, Reno (US)
Corresponding author
Stephens, Jaclyn A.
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-07
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
553-559
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
OpenAlex
W2336883359
Cited by
130
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 1
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Brain stimulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • NEI (R15EY022775)
  • NIGMS IDeA (1P20GM103650)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
working memory training, transcranial direct current stimulation, older adults, executive function, far transfer, cognitive aging, cognitive training, COMT Val158Met, functional near-infrared spectroscopy, home-based assessment, frontal lobe
MeSH terms
Cognitive Remediation, Aged, Aging, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Genotype, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Healthy Volunteers, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation

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