Beneficial effect of computer-based multidomain cognitive training in patients with mild cognitive impairment

Μαρτζούκου, Μαρία; Siokas, Vasileios; Aretouli, Eleni; Aloizou, Athina‐Maria; Folia, Vasiliki; Peristeri, Eleni; Messinis, Lambros; Nasios, Grigorios; Dardiotis, Efthimios

doi:10.1080/23279095.2019.1692842

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, it is unclear if these improvements transfer to cognition/functioning in daily life, are maintained at long-term follow-up, or alter the disease course in mild cognitive impairment. 60,61,[72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85] When looking at specific interventions in mild cognitive impairment, cognitive training that focuses on episodic memory strategies has shown promise in improving memory, relative to a waitlist control. 86 Likewise, among adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment, mnemonic training has improved, though not fully restored, memory at posttreatment and 1-month follow-up, 87 and computerized memory-attention training improved episodic memory at posttreatment and at 6-month follow-up.…”

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Training On Cognition In Mild Cognitive Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mindfulness and Cognitive Training Interventions in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Impact on Cognition and Mood

Reynolds

Willment

Gale

2021

The American Journal of Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Training On Cognition In Mild Cognitive Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mindfulness and Cognitive Training Interventions in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Impact on Cognition and Mood

Reynolds

Willment

Gale

2021

The American Journal of Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The overall attrition rate of both VRCT and CBCT was satisfactory (all less than 20%), except the CBCT study done by Finn and McDonald (2012) recorded a 33% attrition rate. The attrition rate ranged from 0% [25] to 33% [15], though dropout rate was not specified in some studies [22,23,[26][27][28][29][30]. The primary reason for dropouts was mainly independent of the intervention, such as unrelated medical or personal issues [15,[31][32][33][34].…”

Section: Compliance and Attrition Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Cognitive Training (VRCT) and Computer-Based Cognitive Training (CBCT) for Individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI)

Hung

Lai

et al. 2020

Electronics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of virtual reality cognitive training (VRCT) and conventional computer-based cognitive training (CBCT) in five specific cognitive domains (i.e., global cognitive function (GCF), memory (Mem), executive function (EF), language (Lang) and visuospatial skills (VS)) of individuals with mild cognitive impairment. A total of 320 studies were yielded from five electronic databases. Eighteen randomized controlled trials met the PRISMA criteria, with 10 related to VRCT and 8 related to CBCT. A random-effect model was used in determining the main effect of cognitive training in five specific cognitive domains. VRCT provided the largest effect size on VS and Lang while the smallest on EF. CBCT provided the largest effect size on Mem and Lang while the smallest on EF. VRCT and CBCT generate an opposite effect on VS. VRCT outweighs CBCT in treatment effectiveness of GCF, EF, Lang and VS. More immersive and interactive experiences in VRCT may help individuals with MCI better engage in real-life experiences, which supports skill generalization and reduces external distractions. CBCT tends to improve Mem but no definite conclusions can be made. Further investigation with more stringent research design and specific protocol are required to reach consensus about the optimum intervention regime.

show abstract

“…In terms of post-stroke cognitive improvement, the effectiveness of computerized cognitive training in some specific aspects of cognition, such as memory and executive functions, has been suggested in recent systematic reviews and clinical guidelines (72)(73)(74).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuropsychological Assessments of Patients With Acquired Brain Injury: A Cluster Analysis Approach to Address Heterogeneity in Web-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to (1) apply cluster analysis techniques to mixed-type data (numerical and categorical) from baseline neuropsychological standard and widely used assessments of patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) (2) apply state-of-the-art cluster validity indexes (CVI) to assess their internal validity (3) study their external validity considering relevant aspects of ABI rehabilitation such as functional independence measure (FIM) in activities of daily life assessment (4) characterize the identified profiles by using demographic and clinically relevant variables and (5) extend the external validation of the obtained clusters to all cognitive rehabilitation tasks executed by the participants in a web-based cognitive rehabilitation platform (GNPT). We analyzed 1,107 patients with ABI, 58.1% traumatic brain injury (TBI), 21.8% stroke and 20.1% other ABIs (e.g., brain tumors, anoxia, infections) that have undergone inpatient GNPT cognitive rehabilitation from September 2008 to January 2021. We applied the k-prototypes algorithm from the clustMixType R package. We optimized seven CVIs and applied bootstrap resampling to assess clusters stability (fpc R package). Clusters' post hoc comparisons were performed using the Wilcoxon ranked test, paired t-test or Chi-square test when appropriate. We identified a three-clusters optimal solution, with strong stability (>0.85) and structure (e.g., Silhouette > 0.60, Gamma > 0.83), characterized by distinctive level of performance in all neuropsychological tests, demographics, FIM, response to GNPT tasks and tests normative data (e.g., the 3 min cut-off in Trail Making Test-B). Cluster 1 was characterized by severe cognitive impairment (N = 254, 22.9%) the mean age was 47 years, 68.5% patients with TBI and 22% with stroke. Cluster 2 was characterized by mild cognitive impairment (N = 376, 33.9%) mean age 54 years, 53.5% patients with stroke and 27% other ABI. Cluster 3, moderate cognitive impairment (N = 477, 43.2%) mean age 33 years, 83% patients with TBI and 14% other ABI. Post hoc analysis on cognitive FIM supported a significant higher performance of Cluster 2 vs. Cluster 3 (p < 0.001), Cluster 2 vs. Cluster 1 (p < 0.001) and Cluster 3 vs. Cluster 1 (p < 0.001). All patients executed 286,798 GNPT tasks, with performance significantly higher in Cluster 2 and 3 vs. Cluster 1 (p < 0.001).

show abstract

Beneficial effect of computer-based multidomain cognitive training in patients with mild cognitive impairment

Cited by 24 publications

References 73 publications

Mindfulness and Cognitive Training Interventions in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Impact on Cognition and Mood

Mindfulness and Cognitive Training Interventions in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Impact on Cognition and Mood

Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Cognitive Training (VRCT) and Computer-Based Cognitive Training (CBCT) for Individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI)

Neuropsychological Assessments of Patients With Acquired Brain Injury: A Cluster Analysis Approach to Address Heterogeneity in Web-Based Cognitive Rehabilitation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About