↓ Skip to main content

Aging, Training, and the Brain: A Review and Future Directions

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychology Review, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 492)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
patent
7 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
516 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
696 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Aging, Training, and the Brain: A Review and Future Directions
Published in
Neuropsychology Review, October 2009
DOI 10.1007/s11065-009-9119-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cindy Lustig, Priti Shah, Rachael Seidler, Patricia A. Reuter-Lorenz

Abstract

As the population ages, the need for effective methods to maintain or even improve older adults' cognitive performance becomes increasingly pressing. Here we provide a brief review of the major intervention approaches that have been the focus of past research with healthy older adults (strategy training, multi-modal interventions, cardiovascular exercise, and process-based training), and new approaches that incorporate neuroimaging. As outcome measures, neuroimaging data on intervention-related changes in volume, structural integrity; and functional activation can provide important insights into the nature and duration of an intervention's effects. Perhaps even more intriguingly, several recent studies have used neuroimaging data as a guide to identify core cognitive processes that can be trained in one task with effective transfer to other tasks that share the same underlying processes. Although many open questions remain, this research has greatly increased our understanding of how to promote successful aging of cognition and the brain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 696 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 2%
Germany 9 1%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Canada 5 <1%
Spain 4 <1%
Sweden 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Other 12 2%
Unknown 637 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 160 23%
Researcher 107 15%
Student > Master 87 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 68 10%
Student > Bachelor 54 8%
Other 139 20%
Unknown 81 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 317 46%
Neuroscience 67 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 49 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 6%
Sports and Recreations 24 3%
Other 84 12%
Unknown 113 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2023.
All research outputs
#699,683
of 25,362,278 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychology Review
#24
of 492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,723
of 108,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychology Review
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,362,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 492 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 108,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.