Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35928994›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022

Effects of combined cognitive and physical intervention on enhancing cognition in older adults with and without mild cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kaiyue Han, Zhiqing Tang, Zirong Bai, Wenlong Su, Hao Zhang

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. "Brain-IT": Exergame training with biofeedback breathing in neurocognitive disorders.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kaiyue HanSchool of Rehabilitation, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zhiqing TangSchool of Rehabilitation, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zirong BaiFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Wenlong SuSchool of Rehabilitation, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Hao ZhangSchool of Rehabilitation, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Combined cognitive and physical intervention is commonly used as a non-pharmacological therapy to improve cognitive function in older adults, but it is uncertain whether combined intervention can produce stronger cognitive gains than either single cognitive or sham intervention. To address this uncertainty, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of combined intervention on cognition in older adults with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: We systematically searched eight databases for relevant articles published from inception to November 1, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) were used to compare the effects of the combined intervention with a single cognitive or sham intervention on cognition in older adults with and without MCI aged ≥ 50 years. We also searched Google Scholar, references of the included articles, and relevant reviews. Two independent reviewers performed the article screening, data extraction, and bias assessment. GRADEpro was used to rate the strength of evidence, and RevMan software was used to perform the meta-analysis. Results: Seventeen studies were included in the analysis, comprising eight studies of cognitively healthy older adults and nine studies of older adults with MCI. The meta-analysis showed that the combined intervention significantly improved most cognitive functions and depression (SMD = 0.99, 95% CI 0.54-1.43, Conclusions: Combined intervention improves cognitive functions in older adults with and without MCI, especially in global cognition, memory, and executive function. However, there was no statistical difference in the efficacy of the combined intervention to improve cognition between cognitive healthy older adults and older adults with MCI. Moreover, the maintenance of the combined intervention remains unclear due to the limited follow-up data and high heterogeneity. In the future, more stringent study designs with more follow-ups are needed further to explore the effects of combined intervention in older adults. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42021292490.

Indexed as

cognitioncombined cognitive and physical interventionmeta-analysismild cognitive impairmentolder adultssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35928994
PMCPMC9343961

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.