Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Aug 18;9(8):e027062.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027062.

Effect of computerised cognitive training on cognitive outcomes in mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Haifeng Zhang  1   2 , Jonathan Huntley  1 , Rohan Bhome  1 , Benjamin Holmes  1 , Jack Cahill  3 , Rebecca L Gould  1 , Huali Wang  2 , Xin Yu  2 , Robert Howard  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effect of computerised cognitive training on cognitive outcomes in mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Haifeng Zhang et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the effect of computerised cognitive training (CCT) on improving cognitive function for older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were searched through January 2018.

Eligibility criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing CCT with control conditions in those with MCI aged 55+ were included.

Data extraction and synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Effect sizes (Hedges' g and 95% CIs) were calculated and random-effects meta-analyses were performed where three or more studies investigated a comparable intervention and outcome. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic.

Results: 18 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analyses, involving 690 participants. Meta-analysis revealed small to moderate positive treatment effects compared with control interventions in four domains as follows: global cognitive function (g=0.23, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.44), memory (g=0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.50), working memory (g=0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.66) and executive function (g=0.20, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.43). Statistical significance was reached in all domains apart from executive function.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides evidence that CCT improves cognitive function in older people with MCI. However, the long-term transfer of these improvements and the potential to reduce dementia prevalence remains unknown. Various methodological issues such as heterogeneity in outcome measures, interventions and MCI symptoms and lack of intention-to-treat analyses limit the quality of the literature and represent areas for future research.

Keywords: cognitive outcomes; cognitive training; computerised; meta-analysis; mild cognitive training (MCI).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the study selection process. AD, Alzheimer’s disease; RCT, randomised controlled trial.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot demonstrating the efficacy of CCT on global cognition function. CCT, computerised cognitive training; IV, interval variable.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot demonstrating the efficacy of CCT on memory, working memory and executive function. CCT, computerised cognitive training; IV, interval variable.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alzheimer’s Disease International. World Alzheimer Report 2015, 2015.
    1. Huckans M, Hutson L, Twamley E, et al. . Efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation therapies for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in older adults: working toward a theoretical model and evidence-based interventions. Neuropsychol Rev 2013;23:63–80. 10.1007/s11065-013-9230-9 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brookmeyer R, Johnson E, Ziegler-Graham K, et al. . Forecasting the global burden of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 2007;3:186–91. 10.1016/j.jalz.2007.04.381 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, et al. . Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 1999;56:303–8. - PubMed
    1. Gauthier S, Reisberg B, Zaudig M, et al. . Mild cognitive impairment. Lancet 2006;367:1262–70. 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68542-5 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources