The Effectiveness and Safety of Serious Games for Improving Cognitive Abilities Among Elderly People With Cognitive Impairment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is a mental disorder that commonly affects elderly people. Serious games, which are games that have a purpose other than entertainment, have been used as a nonpharmacological intervention for improving cognitive abilities. The effectiveness and safety of serious games for improving cognitive abilities have been investigated by several systematic reviews; however, they are limited by design and methodological weaknesses. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of serious games for improving cognitive abilities among elderly people with cognitive impairment. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. The following 8 electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Google Scholar. We also screened reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews, as well as checked studies citing our included studies. Two reviewers independently carried out the study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality of evidence appraisal. We used a narrative and statistical approach, as appropriate, to synthesize the results of the included studies. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met the eligibility criteria among 466 citations retrieved. Of those, 14 RCTs were eventually included in the meta-analysis. We found that, regardless of their type, serious games were more effective than no intervention (P=.04) and conventional exercises (P=.002) for improving global cognition among elderly people with cognitive impairment. Further, a subgroup analysis showed that cognitive training games were more effective than no intervention (P=.05) and conventional exercises (P<.001) for improving global cognition among elderly people with cognitive impairment. Another subgroup analysis demonstrated that exergames (a category of serious games that includes physical exercises) are as effective as no intervention and conventional exercises (P=.38) for improving global cognition among elderly people with cognitive impairment. Although some studies found adverse events from using serious games, the number of adverse events (ie, falls and exacerbations of pre-existing arthritis symptoms) was comparable between the serious game and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Serious games and specifically cognitive training games have the potential to improve global cognition among elderly people with cognitive impairment. However, our findings remain inconclusive because the quality of evidence in all meta-analyses was very low, mainly due to the risk of bias raised in the majority of the included studies, high heterogeneity of the evidence, and imprecision of total effect sizes. Therefore, psychologists, psychiatrists, and patients should consider offering serious games as a complement and not a substitute to existing interventions until further more robust evidence is available. Further studies are needed to assess the effect of exergames, the safety of serious games, and their long-term effects.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,040 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,019 | 0,032 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».