| Title |
Technology-based cognitive training and rehabilitation interventions for individuals with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-018-0893-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shaoqing Ge, Zheng Zhu, Bei Wu, Eleanor S. McConnell |
| Abstract |
Individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are at heightened risk of developing dementia. Rapid advances in computing technology have enabled researchers to conduct cognitive training and rehabilitation interventions with the assistance of technology. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of technology-based cognitive training or rehabilitation interventions to improve cognitive function among individuals with MCI. We conducted a systematic review using the following criteria: individuals with MCI, empirical studies, and evaluated a technology-based cognitive training or rehabilitation intervention. Twenty-six articles met the criteria. Studies were characterized by considerable variation in study design, intervention content, and technologies applied. The major types of technologies applied included computerized software, tablets, gaming consoles, and virtual reality. Use of technology to adjust the difficulties of tasks based on participants' performance was an important feature. Technology-based cognitive training and rehabilitation interventions had significant effect on global cognitive function in 8 out of 22 studies; 8 out of 18 studies found positive effects on attention, 9 out of 16 studies on executive function, and 16 out of 19 studies on memory. Some cognitive interventions improved non-cognitive symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and ADLs. Technology-based cognitive training and rehabilitation interventions show promise, but the findings were inconsistent due to the variations in study design. Future studies should consider using more consistent methodologies. Appropriate control groups should be designed to understand the additional benefits of cognitive training and rehabilitation delivered with the assistance of technology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 378 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 378 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 51 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 10% |
| Researcher | 34 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 6% |
| Other | 51 | 13% |
| Unknown | 143 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 60 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 38 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 28 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 53 | 14% |
| Unknown | 159 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 23 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,078,922
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#493
of 3,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,609
of 337,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#20
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 337,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.