Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive and memory training in adults at risk of dementia: A Systematic Review

Open access
Gates, Nicola J, Sachdev, Perminder S, Fiatarone Singh, Maria A, Valenzuela, Michael·2011·BMC Geriatrics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Effective non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to prevent Alzheimer's dementia or slow its progression are an urgent international priority. The aim of this review was to evaluate cognitive training trials in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and evaluate the efficacy of training in memory strategies or cognitive exercises to determine if cognitive training could benefit individuals at risk of developing dementia. METHODS: A systematic review of eligible trials was undertaken, followed by effect size analysis. Cognitive training was differentiated from other cognitive interventions not meeting generally accepted definitions, and included both cognitive exercises and memory strategies. RESULTS: Ten studies enrolling a total of 305 subjects met criteria for cognitive training in MCI. Only five of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Meta-analysis was not considered appropriate due to the heterogeneity of interventions. Moderate effects on memory outcomes were identified in seven trials. Cognitive exercises (relative effect sizes ranged from .10 to 1.21) may lead to greater benefits than memory strategies (.88 to -1.18) on memory. CONCLUSIONS: Previous conclusions of a lack of efficacy for cognitive training in MCI may have been influenced by not clearly defining the intervention. Our systematic review found that cognitive exercises can produce moderate-to-large beneficial effects on memory-related outcomes. However, the number of high quality RCTs remains low, and so further trials must be a priority. Several suggestions for the better design of cognitive training trials are provided.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2318-11-55

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Gates, N. J., Sachdev, P. S., Fiatarone Singh, M. A., & Valenzuela, M.
Venue
BMC Geriatrics
Published
2011-09-25
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
55-55
ISSN
1471-2318 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2064307988
Cited by
309
References
6
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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 and memory training in adults at risk of dementia: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2318-11-55
The paper
Gates, N. J., Sachdev, P. S., Fiatarone Singh, M. A., & Valenzuela, M. (2011). Cognitive and memory training in adults at risk of dementia: A Systematic Review. BMC Geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-11-55

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.