↓ Skip to main content

Effects of computerized cognitive training on neuroimaging outcomes in older adults: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
200 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of computerized cognitive training on neuroimaging outcomes in older adults: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0529-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisanne F. ten Brinke, Jennifer C. Davis, Cindy K. Barha, Teresa Liu-Ambrose

Abstract

Worldwide, the population is aging and the number of individuals diagnosed with dementia is rising rapidly. Currently, there are no effective pharmaceutical cures. Hence, identifying lifestyle approaches that may prevent, delay, or treat cognitive impairment and dementia in older adults is becoming increasingly important. Computerized Cognitive Training (CCT) is a promising strategy to combat cognitive decline. Yet, the underlying mechanisms of the effect of CCT on cognition remain poorly understood. Hence, the primary objective of this systematic review was to examine peer-reviewed literature ascertaining the effect of CCT on both structural and functional neuroimaging measures among older adults to gain insight into the underlying mechanisms by which CCT may benefit cognitive function. In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, we used the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Two independent reviewers abstracted data using pre-defined terms. These included: main study characteristics such as the type of training (i.e., single- versus multi-domain), participant demographics (age ≥ 50 years; no psychiatric conditions), and the inclusion of neuroimaging outcomes. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale was used to assess quality of all studies included in this systematic review. Nine studies were included in this systematic review, with four studies including multiple MRI sequences. Results of this systematic review are mixed: CCT was found to increase and decrease both brain structure and function in older adults. In addition, depending on region of interest, both increases and decreases in structure and function were associated with behavioural performance. Of all studies included in this systematic review, results from the highest quality studies, which were two randomized controlled trials, demonstrated that multi-domain CCT could lead to increases in hippocampal functional connectivity. Further high quality studies that include an active control, a sample size calculation, and an appropriate training dosage, are needed to confirm these findings and their relation to cognition.

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 200 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 200 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 15%
Student > Master 29 14%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Researcher 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Other 31 16%
Unknown 59 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 46 23%
Neuroscience 29 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 67 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 April 2019.
All research outputs
#16,346,895
of 24,076,257 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,530
of 3,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,226
of 315,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#52
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,076,257 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,326 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.