ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Mobile Application Applied for Cognitive Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Occupational Therapists' Experiences and Perspectives About Using Apps in Neurorehabilitation in India: A Qualitative Study Protocol.MethodsX · 2025Article
- Cognitive Training Mobile Apps for Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: App Store Search and Quality Evaluation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the demand for home rehabilitation services, leading to the development and rising demand for cognitive rehabilitation apps. However, a comprehensive analysis of the content and effectiveness of these apps is needed. This study systematically reviewed and analyzed the literature on mobile apps for cognitive rehabilitation. One researcher and an external expert conducted the study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment following the PRISMA Checklist 2020 guidelines. Our review of 18 studies identified 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (44.44%) of high quality and 10 non-RCT studies (55.56%) of moderate quality. Overall, 16 of the 18 studies (88.88%) demonstrated positive clinical implications for cognitive function after using cognitive rehabilitation apps. Eight studies showed a correlation between app use and improved cognitive function, and four highlighted the potential for cognitive function evaluation through apps. All studies employed various occupational therapy (OT) intervention approaches, with prevention being the most common (100%), followed by establishment and restoration (83.33%), maintenance (77.77%), and creation and promotion (38.88%). This study clinically validates the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation mobile applications from an occupational therapy perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.