Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBahar-Fuchs, A
dc.contributor.authorWebb, S
dc.contributor.authorBartsch, L
dc.contributor.authorClare, L
dc.contributor.authorRebok, G
dc.contributor.authorCherbuin, N
dc.contributor.authorAnstey, KJ
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-20T10:04:41Z
dc.date.issued2017-10-03
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Computerized Cognitive Training (CCT) has been shown to improve cognitive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mood-related neuropsychiatric symptoms (MrNPS), but many questions remain unresolved. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the extent to which CCT benefits older adults with both MCI and MrNPS, and its effects on meta-cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes, as well as establish whether adapting difficulty levels and tailoring to individuals' profile is superior to generic training. METHODS: Older adults with MCI (n = 9), MrNPS (n = 11), or both (MCI+, n = 25) were randomized into a home-based individually-tailored and adaptive CCT (n = 21) or an active control condition (AC; n = 23) in a double-blind design. Interventions lasted 8-12 weeks and outcomes were assessed after the intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants in both conditions reported greater satisfaction with their everyday memory following intervention and at follow-up. However, participants in the CCT condition showed greater improvement on composite measures of memory, learning, and global cognition at follow-up. Participants with MrNPS in the CCT condition were also found to have improved mood at 3-month follow-up and reported using fewer memory strategies at the post-intervention and follow-up assessments. There was no evidence that participants with MCI+ were disadvantaged relative to the other diagnostic conditions. Finally, informant-rated caregiver burden declined at follow-up assessment in the CCT condition relative to the AC condition. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based CCT with adaptive difficulty and personal tailoring appears superior to more generic CCT in relation to both cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes. Mechanisms of treatment effect and future directions are discussed.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThe trial was supported by grants from the Australian Dementia Collaborative Research Centre, and the Alzheimer’s Australia Dementia Research Foundation.en_GB
dc.identifier.citation, Vol. 60, pp. 889 - 911en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.3233/JAD-170404
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/29936
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherIOS Pressen_GB
dc.relation.sourceThe dataset used and analyzed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.en_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28922158en_GB
dc.rights© 2017 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserveden_GB
dc.subjectBehavior change techniquesen_GB
dc.subjectcognitive trainingen_GB
dc.subjectmild cognitive impairmenten_GB
dc.subjectrandomized controlled trialen_GB
dc.titleTailored and Adaptive Computerized Cognitive Training in Older Adults at Risk for Dementia: A Randomized Controlled Trialen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2017-10-20T10:04:41Z
exeter.place-of-publicationNetherlandsen_GB
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from IOS Press via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalJournal of Alzheimer's Diseaseen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record