MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2057307940 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2013.05.608

P1–381: Effects of cognitive training, as measured with fMRI, in mild cognitive impairment: A brief review

2013· review· en· W2057307940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sharon Sanz Simon, Juliana Emy Yokomizo, Joana Bisol Balardin, Eliane Correa Miotto, Cássio Machado de Campos Bottino

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive trainingCognitionCognitive rehabilitation therapyFunctional magnetic resonance imagingPsychologyDementiaNeuropsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationRehabilitationNeuroimagingPopulationMedicineNeurosciencePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) often represents a transitional state between normal aging and early dementia and is commonly associated with memory impairment. Studies report benefits of cognitive training to amnestic MCI patients, however it is still unclear the patterns of brain activation underlying these interventions. Thus, recently studies have used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to understand changes in brain activation after cognitive training for this population. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from 2000 to December 2012. The following key terms were combined with “Mild Cognitive Impairment”: “Neuropsychological Rehabilitation”, “Cognitive Rehabilitation”, “Cognitive Training”, “Memory Training”, “Memory Rehabilitation”,“Magnetic Resonance” and “Neuroimaging”. Articles were selected if they met the inclusion criteria: 1)Petersen's criteria for amnestic MCI; 2)The study should evaluate cognitive effects after cognitive training; 3)Presence of fMRI data pre and post training. A meta-analysis was performed involving memory encoding tasks. It was used post vs. pre-training contrasts and tabulated results in a standard brain (Montreal Neurological Institute or Tailarach). Peaks of activation were collected and analysed using Activation Likelihood Estimation. From 5 studies selected for the review, 4 were eligible for the meta-analysis. Despite the different intervention programs, all studies described memory benefits of cognitive training, which included attention practicing, learning and training of memory strategies to learn new information, such as visual imagery, organization techniques, object-location and face-name associations. All studies found changes in brain activation post-training. Regarding fMRI data, the meta-analysis showed 41 peak activation foci areas from 34 participants. During encoding tasks, the analysis revealed increased brain activation after training in clusters with main peaks located in the bilateral precuneus, left parahippocampal gyrus and right posterior cingulate cortex. Also, one study reported increased of hippocampal activity during encoding and retrieval tasks after training. Cognitive training to a-MCI patients can provide benefits on memory and changes in the pattern of brain activation, involving different brain areas, including those areas associated with memory. However, all results must be interpreted with caution due to the methodological limitations of the studies, such as small sample size, non-controlled experimental designs and heterogeneity of the instruments, memory strategies and fMRI paradigms used.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→