MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409618786 · doi:10.2196/70291

Nonpharmacological Multimodal Interventions for Cognitive Functions in Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4409618786 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raffy Chi-Fung Chan, Ju Zhou, Yuan Cao, Kenneth Lo, Peter H. F. Ng, David Shum, Arnold Yu Lok Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintCognitive impairmentPsychological interventionCognitionPsychologyDementiaMedicineGerontologyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As the global population ages, the prevalence of dementia is expected to rise significantly. To alleviate the burden on health care systems and the economy, it is essential to develop effective strategies to enhance cognitive function in older adults. Previous studies have shown that combined nonpharmacological interventions can improve cognition across various domains in older individuals. However, there is no established gold standard for the exact combination and duration of these interventions, which makes it challenging to assess their overall effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: Given the diversity of nonpharmacological multimodal interventions aimed at preventing cognitive decline in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), this scoping review sought to identify and summarize the characteristics and outcomes of these interventions. METHODS: We adhered to the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) and searched 4 electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) systematically on July 6, 2023, and updated the search on April 17, 2024, using specific terms and keywords. RESULTS: This review included 45 studies from 18 countries with 4705 participants from 2014 to 2024 encompassing different combinations of physical training (PT), cognitive training (CT), nutrition intervention, psychosocial intervention, social activities, and electrical stimulation. There is a growing numbers of studies combining PT and CT for MCI treatment, with additional modalities often added to address various aspects of the condition. Compared to single-modal interventions and usual care, multimodal approaches demonstrated significantly better improvements in cognition domains such as attention, global cognition, executive function, memory, processing speed, and verbal fluency. Technology has been instrumental in delivering these interventions and enhancing the effects of PT and CT. Multimodal interventions also show promise in terms of acceptability and user experience, which can improve treatment adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Research is limited regarding the cost-effectiveness and optimal dosage of these interventions, making it difficult to assess the additional benefits of incorporating more modalities. Future research should examine the long-term effects of incorporating multiple modalities, using standardized MCI criteria and outcome measures.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207