阿尔茨海默病和其他形式痴呆的认知训练:来自系统回顾和贝叶斯荟萃分析的见解。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Francesco Giaquinto, Marika Iaia, Ezia Rizzi, Luigi Macchitella, Daniele Luigi Romano, Giorgia Tosi, Paola Angelelli
{"title":"阿尔茨海默病和其他形式痴呆的认知训练:来自系统回顾和贝叶斯荟萃分析的见解。","authors":"Francesco Giaquinto, Marika Iaia, Ezia Rizzi, Luigi Macchitella, Daniele Luigi Romano, Giorgia Tosi, Paola Angelelli","doi":"10.1177/13872877251334795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThe prevalence of individuals living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other forms of dementia is globally increasing. Four out of nine international clinical guidelines recommend non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to enhance cognition, independence, and wellbeing. However, the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation (CR) and cognitive training (CT) for individuals with MCI and AD and other forms of dementia is still debatable, often due to significant heterogeneity among studies.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of CT and CR in these populations.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across databases including OVID, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus, identifying randomized controlled trials and non-randomized pre-post intervention studies. The Bayesian meta-analysis focused on pre-post changes in global cognition, quality of life, everyday functioning, and depression, avoiding comparisons with control groups to reduce heterogeneity (PROSPERO: CRD42022365038).ResultsThe search yielded 6075 results, with 40 studies meeting inclusion criteria, encompassing 50 independent trials. CT and people with AD and other dementias are the best represented intervention and population, respectively. CT was more effective in improving global cognition in individuals with AD and other dementias, and paper-and-pencil and face-to-face formats yielded greater benefits. The analysis showed a significant susceptibility to bias among the studies.ConclusionsLimitations in outcome measure (e.g., MMSE) suggest the need for more sensitive assessments, especially for MCI. Future research should explore broader aspects of wellbeing and investigate the potential of CR. Policymakers are encouraged to consider these findings when designing cognitive interventions for this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":14929,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease","volume":" ","pages":"13872877251334795"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive training for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia: Insights from a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Giaquinto, Marika Iaia, Ezia Rizzi, Luigi Macchitella, Daniele Luigi Romano, Giorgia Tosi, Paola Angelelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13872877251334795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BackgroundThe prevalence of individuals living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other forms of dementia is globally increasing. Four out of nine international clinical guidelines recommend non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to enhance cognition, independence, and wellbeing. However, the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation (CR) and cognitive training (CT) for individuals with MCI and AD and other forms of dementia is still debatable, often due to significant heterogeneity among studies.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of CT and CR in these populations.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across databases including OVID, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus, identifying randomized controlled trials and non-randomized pre-post intervention studies. The Bayesian meta-analysis focused on pre-post changes in global cognition, quality of life, everyday functioning, and depression, avoiding comparisons with control groups to reduce heterogeneity (PROSPERO: CRD42022365038).ResultsThe search yielded 6075 results, with 40 studies meeting inclusion criteria, encompassing 50 independent trials. CT and people with AD and other dementias are the best represented intervention and population, respectively. CT was more effective in improving global cognition in individuals with AD and other dementias, and paper-and-pencil and face-to-face formats yielded greater benefits. The analysis showed a significant susceptibility to bias among the studies.ConclusionsLimitations in outcome measure (e.g., MMSE) suggest the need for more sensitive assessments, especially for MCI. Future research should explore broader aspects of wellbeing and investigate the potential of CR. Policymakers are encouraged to consider these findings when designing cognitive interventions for this population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"13872877251334795\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251334795\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Alzheimer's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251334795","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

全球范围内,患有轻度认知障碍(MCI)、阿尔茨海默病(AD)和其他形式痴呆症的个体患病率正在上升。九项国际临床指南中有四项建议采用非药物认知干预措施来增强认知、独立性和幸福感。然而,认知康复(CR)和认知训练(CT)对MCI、AD和其他形式痴呆患者的有效性仍然存在争议,这通常是由于研究之间存在显著的异质性。目的评价CT和CR在这些人群中的有效性。方法遵循PRISMA指南,我们对包括OVID、MEDLINE、EMBASE和Scopus在内的数据库进行了全面的文献检索,确定了随机对照试验和非随机干预前后研究。贝叶斯荟萃分析侧重于整体认知、生活质量、日常功能和抑郁的前后变化,避免与对照组进行比较以减少异质性(PROSPERO: CRD42022365038)。结果检索得到6075项结果,其中40项研究符合纳入标准,包括50项独立试验。CT和AD及其他痴呆患者分别是最具代表性的干预措施和人群。CT在改善阿尔茨海默症和其他痴呆症患者的整体认知能力方面更有效,而纸笔治疗和面对面治疗的效果更大。分析显示,研究中存在明显的偏倚易感性。结论:结果测量的局限性(如MMSE)表明需要更敏感的评估,特别是MCI。未来的研究应该探索更广泛的健康方面,并调查CR的潜力。鼓励政策制定者在为这一人群设计认知干预措施时考虑这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive training for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia: Insights from a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

BackgroundThe prevalence of individuals living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and other forms of dementia is globally increasing. Four out of nine international clinical guidelines recommend non-pharmacological cognitive interventions to enhance cognition, independence, and wellbeing. However, the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation (CR) and cognitive training (CT) for individuals with MCI and AD and other forms of dementia is still debatable, often due to significant heterogeneity among studies.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the effectiveness of CT and CR in these populations.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across databases including OVID, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus, identifying randomized controlled trials and non-randomized pre-post intervention studies. The Bayesian meta-analysis focused on pre-post changes in global cognition, quality of life, everyday functioning, and depression, avoiding comparisons with control groups to reduce heterogeneity (PROSPERO: CRD42022365038).ResultsThe search yielded 6075 results, with 40 studies meeting inclusion criteria, encompassing 50 independent trials. CT and people with AD and other dementias are the best represented intervention and population, respectively. CT was more effective in improving global cognition in individuals with AD and other dementias, and paper-and-pencil and face-to-face formats yielded greater benefits. The analysis showed a significant susceptibility to bias among the studies.ConclusionsLimitations in outcome measure (e.g., MMSE) suggest the need for more sensitive assessments, especially for MCI. Future research should explore broader aspects of wellbeing and investigate the potential of CR. Policymakers are encouraged to consider these findings when designing cognitive interventions for this population.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
1327
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Alzheimer''s Disease (JAD) is an international multidisciplinary journal to facilitate progress in understanding the etiology, pathogenesis, epidemiology, genetics, behavior, treatment and psychology of Alzheimer''s disease. The journal publishes research reports, reviews, short communications, hypotheses, ethics reviews, book reviews, and letters-to-the-editor. The journal is dedicated to providing an open forum for original research that will expedite our fundamental understanding of Alzheimer''s disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信