Cited by 67Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryCognitive Abilities and Testing

Cognitive training in older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: Impact on cognitive and functional performance

Open access
Brum, Paula Schimidt, Forlenza, Orestes Vicente, Yassuda, Mônica Sanches·2009·Dementia & Neuropsychologia

Abstract

Aging is associated with cognitive decline, yet this does not prevent older adults from finding ways to compensate for age-related deficits. Earlier studies have shown that cognitively unimpaired older adults can benefit from training programs. The efficacy of cognitive interventions among older adults without dementia but with cognitive decline (mild cognitive impairment, MCI) has not yet been widely tested. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of 8-session cognitive training on the cognitive and functional performance of older adults with MCI. METHODS: 16 older adults diagnosed with MCI received cognitive training (18 participated as controls). All participants were assessed pre and post intervention using the Short Cognitive Test (SKT), Direct Assessment of Functional Scale Revised (DAFS-R), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), and Clock Drawing Test (CDT). RESULTS: A significant improvement was observed in the study group between pre and post-test in attention (SKT), time orientation, shopping skills and dealing with finances (DAFS-R) along with reduced depressive symptoms (GDS). CONCLUSION: These results indicate the importance of non-pharmacological interventions for older adults with MCI to help compensate for cognitive decline.

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 · 10.1590/s1980-57642009dn30200010

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • There is sufficient support for the effectiveness of cognitive training in individuals with MCI.

    “There is now sufficient support for the effectiveness of such training in individuals with MCI [5,6].”

    From Designing ICTs for Users with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Usability Study (2020) · cites this paper as [5]

    The Discussion (page not provided) reports significant improvements after training in some cognitive and daily-functioning measures among older adults with MCI. It also says findings across studies are mixed, with some showing no response or only nonsignificant improvement. The claim that support is now sufficient overstates the paper's qualified assessment. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [14]Bottino CM Almeida OP Tamai S Forlenza OV Scalco MZ Carvalho IAM CAMDEX The Cambridge Examination for Mental Disorders of the Elderly: tradução e adaptação para o português. Projeto Terceira Idade (PROTER) 1999 São Paulo Instituto e Departamento de Psiquiatria do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo
  2. [20]Zubicaray G Ashton R Nelson's Modified Cards Sorting Test: a review Clin Neuropsychol 1996 10 245 254

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brum, P. S., Forlenza, O. V., & Yassuda, M. S.
Affiliations
Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
Corresponding author
Yassuda, Mônica Sanches
Venue
Dementia & Neuropsychologia
Published
2009-06
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
124-131
ISSN
1980-5764 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2162158258
Cited by
67
References
43
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 9
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Dementia & Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
cognitive training, mild cognitive impairment, older adults, cognitive decline, functional performance, attention, time orientation, shopping skills, financial management, depressive symptoms, non-pharmacological treatment, compensatory strategies

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