Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25628596›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2014

A RCT Comparing Specific Intensive Cognitive Training to Aspecific Psychological Intervention in RRMS: The SMICT Study.

Flavia Mattioli, Chiara Stampatori, Fabio Bellomi, Maura Danni, Laura Compagnucci, Antonio Uccelli, Matteo Pardini, Giuseppe Santuccio, Giuditta Fregonese, Marianna Pattini and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Motor, cognitive, and combined rehabilitation approaches on MS patients' cognitive impairment.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2023
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Flavia MattioliNeuropsychology Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia , Brescia , Italy.
Chiara StampatoriNeuropsychology Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia , Brescia , Italy.
Fabio BellomiNeuropsychology Unit, Spedali Civili di Brescia , Brescia , Italy.
Maura DanniClinica Neurologica, University of Ancona , Ancona , Italy.
Laura CompagnucciClinica Neurologica, University of Ancona , Ancona , Italy.
Antonio UccelliClinica Neurologica, MS Center, University of Genoa , Genoa , Italy.
Matteo PardiniClinica Neurologica, MS Center, University of Genoa , Genoa , Italy.
Giuseppe SantuccioNeurology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Valtellina Valchiavenna , Sondrio , Italy.
Giuditta FregoneseNeurology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Valtellina Valchiavenna , Sondrio , Italy.
Marianna PattiniNeurology Unit, Fidenza Hospital , Parma , Italy.
Beatrice AllegriNeurology Unit, Fidenza Hospital , Parma , Italy.
Raffaella ClericiNeurology Unit, Como Hospital , Como , Italy.
Annalisa LattuadaNeurology Unit, Como Hospital , Como , Italy.
Cristina MontomoliBiostatistics Unit, Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Pavia University , Pavia , Italy.
Barbara CorsoBiostatistics Unit, Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Pavia University , Pavia , Italy.
Ruggero CapraMS Center, Spedali Civili di Brescia , Brescia , Italy.
Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale degli Spedali Civili di Brescia · ITAzienda Ospedaliera di Valtellina e Valchiavenna · ITCTO Hospital · ITOspedali Riuniti di Ancona · ITUniversity of Genoa · ITUniversity of Pavia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpecific cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis (MS) resulted to be effective compared to no treatment. So far the possible role of an aspecific psychological intervention on cognition has not been investigated.

objectiveThe aim of the SMICT RCT was to compare the efficacy of a specific cognitive training with an aspecific psychological intervention in relapsing-remitting MS patients.

methodsFrom a sample of 150 patients, with the same disability and immunomodulatory therapy, submitted to neuropsychological examination, 45 impaired in at least one test were included and 41 randomized to have either a specific cognitive training for the impaired function (22) or to an aspecific psychological intervention (19) for 4 months, starting after baseline examination. Neuropsychological tests and functional scales were administered at baseline and 1 year later.

resultsAfter 1 year, the mean number of pathological tests was significantly lower in the specific treatment group, compared to the aspecific group. Memory and attention/speeded information processing functions were mostly improved. Depression and quality of life were not different between groups at follow up.

conclusionOur study demonstrates that an intensive and domain specific cognitive approach results to be more effective than aspecific psychological intervention in patients with MS.

Indexed as

attentioncognitive rehabilitationexecutive functions memoryinformation processing speedmultiple sclerosismultiple sclerosis cognitive rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID25628596
PMCPMC4292447
OpenAlexW1983287596

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.