Computerized cognitive training in people with depression: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background People with depression often present with concurrent cognitive impairment. Computerized cognitive training (CCT) is a safe and efficacious strategy to maintain or enhance cognitive performance in a range of clinical populations. However, its efficacy in people with depression and how it varies across populations and design factors are currently unclear. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO from inception to 13 July 2021 for randomised controlled trials examining the efficacy of CCT vs any control condition on cognitive, mood, psychiatric symptoms, psychosocial, and daily functioning in adults with depression. Eligible samples include studies specifically targeting people with major depressive disorder as well as those with other diagnoses where at least 50% of the sample meets the clinical criteria for depression, with the exception of major psychiatric disorders or dementia. The primary outcome is change in the overall cognitive performance. Multivariate analyses will be used to examine the effect sizes on each outcome category as well as possible effect modifiers and correlations between categories. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis of narrowly defined CCT across clinical populations with depression. We aim to investigate not only whether CCT is efficacious for cognition, but also how such effects vary across design factors, what other clinically relevant outcomes might respond to CCT, and the extent to which they differ across populations. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020204209

Download Full-text

Computerized Cognitive Training in People with Depression: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-66217/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Amit Lampit ◽

Nathalie H Launder ◽

Ruth Minkov ◽

Alice Rollini ◽

Christopher G Davey ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cognitive Performance ◽

Cognitive Training ◽

Psychosocial Functioning ◽

Psychiatric Symptoms ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Computerized Cognitive Training ◽

Design Factors ◽

Clinical Populations

Abstract Background People with depression often present with concurrent cognitive impairment. Computerized cognitive training (CCT) is safe and efficacious strategy to maintain or enhance cognitive performance in a range of clinical populations. However, its efficacy in people with depression and how it varies across populations and design factors is currently unclear. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from inception to 29 June 2020 for randomised controlled trials examining the efficacy of CCT vs any control condition on cognitive, mood, psychiatric symptoms, psychosocial functioning and daily function in adults with depression. Eligible samples include studies specifically targeting people with major depressive disorder as well as those with other diagnoses where at least 50% of the sample meets clinical criteria for depression, with the exception of major psychiatric disorders or dementia. The primary outcome is change in overall cognitive performance. Multivariate analyses will be used to examine effect sizes on each outcome category as well as possible effect modifiers and correlations between categories. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2. Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis of narrowly-defined CCT across clinical populations with depression. We aim to investigate not only whether CCT is efficacious for cognition, but also how such effects vary across design factors, what other clinically relevant outcomes might respond to CCT and the extent to which they differ across populations. Systematic review registration: Submitted and pending evaluation with PROSPERO.

Download Full-text

Computerized Cognitive Training in Cognitively Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

10.1101/2020.10.07.20208306 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Amit Lampit ◽

Hanna Malmberg Gavelin ◽

Julieta Sabates ◽

Nathalie H Launder ◽

Harry Hallock ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Cognitive Performance ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Healthy Older Adults ◽

Cognitive Domains ◽

Computerized Cognitive Training ◽

Supervised Training ◽

Design Factors

ABSTRACTBackgroundComputerized cognitive training (CCT) is a broad category of drill-and-practice interventions aims to maintain cognitive performance in older adults. Despite a supportive evidence base for general efficacy, it is unclear what types of CCT are most likely to be beneficial and what intervention design factors are essential for clinical implementation.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to August 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any type of CCT in cognitively healthy older adults. Risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. The primary outcome was change in overall cognitive performance between CCT and control groups. Secondary outcomes were individual cognitive domains. A series of meta-regressions were performed to estimates associations between key design factors and overall efficacy using robust variance estimation models. Network meta-analysis was used to compare the main approaches to CCT against passive or common active control conditions.ResultsNinety RCTs encompassing 7219 participants across 117 comparisons were included. The overall cognitive effect size across all trials was small (g=0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23) with considerable heterogeneity (τ2=0.074, 95% prediction interval −0.36 to 0.73), robust to small-study effect or risk of bias. Effect sizes for individual cognitive domains were small, heterogeneous and statistically significant apart from fluid intelligence and visual processing. Meta-regressions revealed significantly larger effect sizes in trials using supervised training or up to three times per week. Multidomain training was the most efficacious CCT approach against any type of control, with greater benefits in a subset of supervised training studies.ConclusionsThe efficacy of CCT varies substantially across designs, independent of the type of control. Multidomain supervised CCT appears to be the most efficacious approach, and should be developed to accommodate for individual needs and remote delivery settings. Future research should focus on identifying the intervention components and regimens that could attenuate aging-related cognitive decline.

Download Full-text

Computerized Cognitive Training in Cognitively Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effect Modifiers

PLoS Medicine ◽

10.1371/journal.pmed.1001756 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 11 (11) ◽

pp. e1001756 ◽

Cited By ~ 397

Author(s):

Amit Lampit ◽

Harry Hallock ◽

Michael Valenzuela

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Cognitive Training ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Healthy Older Adults ◽

Computerized Cognitive Training

Download Full-text

Computerised cognitive training in Parkinson’s disease: a protocol for a systematic review and updated meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040656 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (11) ◽

pp. e040656

Author(s):

Hanna Malmberg Gavelin ◽

Magdalena Domellöf ◽

Isabella Leung ◽

Anna Stigsdotter Neely ◽

Carsten Finke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Parkinson’S Disease ◽

Parkinson's Disease ◽

Cognitive Function ◽

Cognitive Training ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Motor Symptom ◽

Intervention Design ◽

Design Factors

IntroductionCognitive impairment is recognised as an important non-motor symptom in Parkinson’s disease (PD) and there is a need for evidence-based non-pharmacological interventions that may prevent or slow cognitive decline in this patient group. One such intervention is computerised cognitive training (CCT), which has shown efficacious for cognition across older adult populations. This systematic review aims to investigate the efficacy of CCT across cognitive, psychosocial and functional domains for people with PD and examine study and intervention design factors that could moderate CCT effects on cognition.Methods and analysisRandomised controlled trials investigating the effects of CCT in patients with PD without dementia, on cognitive, psychosocial or functional outcomes, will be included. The primary outcome is overall cognitive function. Secondary outcomes are domain-specific cognitive function, psychosocial functioning and functional abilities. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO through 14 May 2020 to identify relevant literature. Risk of bias will be assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes will be calculated as standardised mean difference of baseline to postintervention change (Hedges’ g) with 95% CI for each eligible outcome measure. Pooling of outcomes across studies will be conducted using random-effects models, accounting for dependency structure of effect sizes within studies. Heterogeneity will be assessed using τ2 and I2 statistic. Potential moderators, based on key study and intervention design factors, will be investigated using mixed-effects meta-regression models.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. The findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020185386.

Download Full-text

Compensatory Interventions for Cognitive Impairments in Psychosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Schizophrenia Bulletin ◽

10.1093/schbul/sbz134 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 46 (4) ◽

pp. 869-883 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kelly Allott ◽

Kristi van-der-EL ◽

Shayden Bryce ◽

Emma M Parrish ◽

Susan R McGurk ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Psychiatric Symptoms ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Medium Effect ◽

Post Intervention ◽

Psychosocial Disability ◽

The Impact

Abstract Objective Cognitive compensatory interventions aim to alleviate psychosocial disability by targeting functioning directly using aids and strategies, thereby minimizing the impact of cognitive impairment. The aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive compensatory interventions for psychosis by examining the effects on functioning and symptoms, and exploring whether intervention factors, study design, and age influenced effect sizes. Methods Electronic databases (Ovid Medline, PsychINFO) were searched up to October 2018. Records obtained through electronic and manual searches were screened independently by two reviewers according to selection criteria. Data were extracted to calculate estimated effects (Hedge’s g) of treatment on functioning and symptoms at post-intervention and follow-up. Study quality was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool. Results Twenty-six studies, from 25 independent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis (1654 participants, mean age = 38.9 years, 64% male). Meta-analysis revealed a medium effect of compensatory interventions on functioning compared to control conditions (Hedge’s g = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.33, 0.60, P < .001), with evidence of relative durability at follow-up (Hedge’s g = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.19, 0.54, P < .001). Analysis also revealed small significant effects of cognitive compensatory treatment on negative, positive, and general psychiatric symptoms, but not depressive symptoms. Estimated effects did not significantly vary according to treatment factors (ie, compensatory approach, dosage), delivery method (ie, individual/group), age, or risk of bias. Longer treatment length was associated with larger effect sizes for functioning outcomes. No evidence of publication bias was identified. Conclusion Cognitive compensatory interventions are associated with robust, durable improvements in functioning in people with psychotic illnesses.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Gamification on Computerized Cognitive Training: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

JMIR Serious Games ◽

10.2196/18644 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. e18644 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Julie F Vermeir ◽

Melanie J White ◽

Daniel Johnson ◽

Geert Crombez ◽

Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cognitive Training ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Empirical Studies ◽

Age Groups ◽

Future Research ◽

Computerized Cognitive Training ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Game Elements ◽

The Impact

Background There has been a growing interest in the application of gamification (ie, the use of game elements) to computerized cognitive training. The introduction of targeted gamification features to such tasks may increase motivation and engagement as well as improve intervention effects. However, it is possible that game elements can also have adverse effects on cognitive training (eg, be a distraction), which can outweigh their potential motivational benefits. So far, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications. Objective This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of gamification on process outcomes (eg, motivation) and on changes in the training domain (eg, cognition), as well as to explore the role of potential moderators. Methods We searched PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Psychology, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Association for Computing Machinery, and a range of gray-area literature databases. The searches included papers published between 2008 and 2018. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Results The systematic review identified 49 studies, of which 9 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the review indicated that research in this context is still developing and lacks well-controlled empirical studies. Gamification in cognitive training is applied to a large range of age groups and audiences and is mostly delivered at a research site through computers. Rewards and feedback continue to dominate the gamification landscape, whereas social-oriented features (eg, competition) are underused. The meta-analyses showed that gamified training tasks were more motivating/engaging (Hedges g=0.72) and more demanding/difficult (Hedges g=–0.52) than non- or less-gamified tasks, whereas no effects on the training domain were found. Furthermore, no variables moderated the impact of gamified training tasks. However, meta-analytic findings were limited due to a small number of studies. Conclusions Overall, this review provides an overview of the existing research in the domain and provides evidence for the effectiveness of gamification in improving motivation/engagement in the context of cognitive training. We discuss the shortcomings in the current literature and provide recommendations for future research.

Download Full-text

The Effects of Gamification on Computerized Cognitive Training: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.18644 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Julie F Vermeir ◽

Melanie J White ◽

Daniel Johnson ◽

Geert Crombez ◽

Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cognitive Training ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Empirical Studies ◽

Age Groups ◽

Future Research ◽

Computerized Cognitive Training ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Game Elements ◽

The Impact

BACKGROUND There has been a growing interest in the application of gamification (ie, the use of game elements) to computerized cognitive training. The introduction of targeted gamification features to such tasks may increase motivation and engagement as well as improve intervention effects. However, it is possible that game elements can also have adverse effects on cognitive training (eg, be a distraction), which can outweigh their potential motivational benefits. So far, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications. OBJECTIVE This study aims to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of gamification on process outcomes (eg, motivation) and on changes in the training domain (eg, cognition), as well as to explore the role of potential moderators. METHODS We searched PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest Psychology, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, Association for Computing Machinery, and a range of gray-area literature databases. The searches included papers published between 2008 and 2018. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. RESULTS The systematic review identified 49 studies, of which 9 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the review indicated that research in this context is still developing and lacks well-controlled empirical studies. Gamification in cognitive training is applied to a large range of age groups and audiences and is mostly delivered at a research site through computers. Rewards and feedback continue to dominate the gamification landscape, whereas social-oriented features (eg, competition) are underused. The meta-analyses showed that gamified training tasks were more motivating/engaging (Hedges g=0.72) and more demanding/difficult (Hedges g=–0.52) than non- or less-gamified tasks, whereas no effects on the training domain were found. Furthermore, no variables moderated the impact of gamified training tasks. However, meta-analytic findings were limited due to a small number of studies. CONCLUSIONS Overall, this review provides an overview of the existing research in the domain and provides evidence for the effectiveness of gamification in improving motivation/engagement in the context of cognitive training. We discuss the shortcomings in the current literature and provide recommendations for future research.

Download Full-text