Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40460432›Full record

ReviewJMIR serious games2025

Technology-Assisted Motor-Cognitive Training Among Older Adults: Rapid Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yaqin Li, Yaqian Liu, Angela Ym Leung, Jed Montayre

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR serious games, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07085663 (Exergame-assisted Simultaneous Motor-cognitive Training for Middle-aged Old Adults in China), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT07085663 narecruitingnot on this map

Exergame-assisted Simultaneous Motor-cognitive Training for Middle-aged Old Adults in China: a Feasibility and Pilot Randomized Controlled Trail Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityRan2025 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsSubjective Cognitive DeclineArmsExergame-assisted simultaneous motor-cognitive training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Yaqin LiSchool of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0024-1210
Yaqian LiuSchool of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0897-0725
Angela Ym LeungSchool of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9836-1925
Jed MontayreSchool of Nursing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China (Hong Kong).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2435-8061

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAge-related physiological changes in older adults involve a rapid decline in motor exercise ability; some older adults may also experience difficulties in maintaining focus, memory loss, and a decline in reaction time, which consequently impair their ability to perform dual tasks. Motor-cognitive training (MCT) refers to a blend of motor activity and cognitive training that occurs simultaneously and can assist older adults in enhancing their physical function, cognitive abilities, and dual-task performance. In recent years, the use of technology for delivering MCT has become increasingly popular in research. This has been achieved through various technologies that simplify MCT for older adults.

objectiveThis study aimed to systematically examine the feasibility and effectiveness studies on technology-assisted MCT among older adults.

methodsThis rapid review was conducted following the updated PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 standards, and the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews reporting guideline. Four databases were searched, including CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus, from January 2013 to March 2025. Search strategies were constructed based on three main topics: (1) older adults, (2) MCT, and (3) technology. Inclusion criteria followed the population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and study design framework as follows: older adults (population); technology-assisted MCT (intervention); standard treatment control, active control, partial intervention control, placebo control, and dose-response control (comparator); various measures of physical, cognitive, and dual-task performance (outcome); and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pilot RCTs (study design). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was applied for quality appraisal of the included studies. The feasibility of the included studies was assessed using completion rates and attrition rates. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of the groups, while narrative methods were used to categorize and synthesize their effectiveness.

resultsIn total, 20 studies were included, comprising 16 RCTs and 4 pilot RCTs, most of which were conducted within a 6-week period. Each session typically lasted between 10 and 30 minutes and was held 2 to 3 times per week. Feasibility analysis showed that technology-assisted MCT was generally feasible. While the workload was high, the perceived usability was also high, with a considerable amount of positive feedback and very few reported adverse events. The types of MCT varied in terms of components, duration, and frequency. The majority of studies (18/20, 90%) demonstrated statistically significant improvements in physical, cognitive, and dual-task performance because of technology-assisted MCT.

conclusionsThe feasibility of technology-assisted MCT among older adults was high regardless of the perceived high workload, and most studies showed statistical effectiveness in improving physical, cognitive, and dual-task performance.

trial registrationOpen Science Foundation (OSF) Registries 10.17605/OSF.IO/5SRCQ; https://osf.io/5srcq.

Indexed as

motor-cognitiveolder adultsperformancerandomized controlled trialstechnology-assisted

Identifiers

PMID40460432
PMCPMC12174886

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.