Effects of Electronic Serious Games on Older Adults With Alzheimer’s Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (Preprint)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Serious games (SGs) are nonpharmacological interventions that are widely applied among older adults. To date, no evidence has been published regarding the effect of digital SGs on cognitive ability, daily behavioral capacity, or depression in older adults with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aimed to assess the effect of SGs on older adults with AD and MCI by summarizing and pooling the results of previous studies. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> This meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of digital SGs in improving cognitive ability, enhancing daily behavioral capacity, and alleviating depression in older adults with AD and MCI. We searched the following databases up to December 31, 2023, to identify relevant high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs): PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Stata 15.1 and Review Manager 5.3 were used to screen the 14 studies, extract data, code the data, and perform meta-analysis. Mean differences and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were used to calculate continuous variables. The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Eligibility criteria were developed in accordance with the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study Design framework: (1) population (older adults with AD and MCI), (2) intervention (digital SG intervention), (3) comparison (digital SG intervention vs routine health care), (4) outcomes (cognitive ability, daily behavioral capacity, and depression), and (5) study or research design (RCT). Sensitivity analysis was performed, and a funnel plot was constructed. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> From January 2017 to December 2023, we enrolled 714 individuals across 14 RCTs, with 374 (52.4%) in the severe game group using digital SGs and 340 (47.6%) in the control group using traditional methods. The results of our meta-analysis indicated that using digital SGs in older adults with AD and MCI is more effective than traditional training methods in several key areas. Specifically, digital SG therapy significantly increased cognitive ability, as found in the Mini-Mental State Examination (SMD 2.11, 95% CI 1.42-2.80; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SMD 2.75, 95% CI 1.98-3.51; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), significantly increased daily behavioral capacity (SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.06-0.99; <i>P</i>=.03), and significantly reduced depression (SMD –2.08, 95% CI –2.94 to –1.22; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) in older adults with AD and MCI. No publication bias was detected based on the results of Begg and Egger tests. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Digital SGs offer a viable and effective nonpharmacological approach for older adults with AD and MCI, yielding better results compared to traditional formats. However, caution is warranted in interpreting these findings due to limited RCTs, small sample sizes, and low-quality meta-analyzed evidence. </sec> <sec> <title>CLINICALTRIAL</title> PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRDCRD42023486090; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=486090 </sec>
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,052 | 0,010 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».