Cited by 50Cognitive Abilities and TestingDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCognitive Functions and Memory

Leveraging technology to personalize cognitive enhancement methods in aging

Open access
Ziegler, David A., Anguera, Joaquin A., Gallen, Courtney L., Hsu, Wan-Yu, Wais, Peter E., Gazzaley, Adam·2022·Nature Aging

Abstract

As population aging advances at an increasing rate, efforts to help people maintain or improve cognitive function late in life are critical. Although some studies have shown promise, the question of whether cognitive training is an effective tool for improving general cognitive ability remains incompletely explored, and study results to date have been inconsistent. Most approaches to cognitive enhancement in older adults have taken a 'one size fits all' tack, as opposed to tailoring interventions to the specific needs of individuals. In this Perspective, we argue that modern technology has the potential to enable large-scale trials of public health interventions to enhance cognition in older adults in a personalized manner. Technology-based cognitive interventions that rely on closed-loop systems can be tailored to individuals in real time and have the potential for global testing, extending their reach to large and diverse populations of older adults. We propose that the future of cognitive enhancement in older adults will rely on harnessing new technologies in scientifically informed ways.

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 · 10.1038/s43587-022-00237-5

Cites

135 of 135 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?

  • Cognitive training through digital platforms offers exercises designed to target specific cognitive domains, such as memory, attention, and executive function, with the goal of improving overall cognitive abilities and everyday functioning.

    “Cognitive training through digital platforms such as through computer programs, smartphone apps, wearables or webbased platforms offer exercises designed to target specific cognitive domains, such as memory, attention, and executive function, with the goal of improving overall cognitive abilities and everyday functioning (Ziegler et al., 2022).”

    From The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Ziegler et al., 2022

    The sections on closed-loop video games and digital meditation describe technology-based interventions targeting attention, working memory and cognitive control; the virtual-reality section addresses long-term memory (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not establish that these exercises improve overall cognitive ability or everyday functioning, and it describes the benefits of cognitive training for older adults as ambiguous. It also does not present the full list of computer programs, apps, wearables and web platforms as interchangeable cognitive-training formats. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [20]Lazar A, Cornejo R, Edasis C & Piper AM In Dis 2016: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems 1047–1058 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2016).
  2. [88]Katz B, Jones MR, Shah P, Buschkuehl M & Jaeggi SM in Cognitive Training 157– 166 (Springer, 2016).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ziegler, D. A., Anguera, J. A., Gallen, C. L., Hsu, W.-Y., Wais, P. E., & Gazzaley, A.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Ziegler, David A.
Venue
Nature Aging
Published
2022-06-17
Volume
2
Issue
6
Pages
475-483
ISSN
2662-8465 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283023732
Cited by
50
References
135
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1
FWCI
10.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | Office of Extramural Research, National Institutes of Health (R01-AG076668, R34-MH100466, K99/R00-AG043557, R01-AG049424, R21-AG058896, R01-AG040333, R21-AG041071)
  • Schwab Dyslexia and Cognitive Diversity Center Innovation Fund Award
  • Neuroscape Network
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
cognitive enhancement, older adults, cognitive training, personalized interventions, technology-based interventions, closed-loop systems, real-time personalization, public health interventions, cognitive aging, large-scale trials
MeSH terms
Cognitive Training, Aged, Aging, Cognition, Humans, Technology

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