ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2015
Evaluation of a Cognitive Rehabilitation Protocol in HIV Patients with Associated Neurocognitive Disorders: Efficacy and Stability Over Time.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cognitive rehabilitation for people with mild to moderate dementia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- The cognitive remediation of attention in HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND): A meta-analysis and systematic review.F1000Research · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of Computerized Cognitive Training and Cognitive and Daily Function in Patients Living With HIV: A Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Changes in cognitive performance following combined CogSMART-SA and BrainHQ interventions: a pilot study.BMC neurology · 2026Trial
- The Effects of High-Dose Probiotic Supplementation on Immune Activation and Neurocognitive Disorders in People Living with HIV Undergoing Successful Antiretroviral Treatment: The Procog Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Trial
- Advances in assessment and cognitive neurorehabilitation of HIV-related neurocognitive impairment.Brain communications · 2025Review
- Cognitive training in adults with intellectual disability: pilot study applying a cognitive tele-rehabilitation program.International journal of developmental disabilities · 2022Article
- Cognitive and Neurologic Rehabilitation Strategies for Central Nervous System HIV Infection.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2020Review
- Brain activations associated with scientific reasoning: a literature review.Cognitive processing · 2019Review
- Examining the effectiveness of a cognitive intervention to improve cognitive function in a population of older adults living with HIV: a pilot study.Therapeutic advances in infectious disease · 2018Article
- Review
- Cognitive Impairment and Persistent CNS Injury in Treated HIV.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2016Review
- Development of cognitive remediation interventions for people living with HIV in South Africa: participant experiences of adapted CogSMART and BrainHQFrontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and stability over time of a cognitive rehabilitation protocol (restorative and compensatory approach) in HIV/AIDS patients with HIV-associated Neurocognitive Disorder (HAND). At baseline, 32 HIV/AIDS patients (16 with and 16 without HAND) were assessed with a neuropsychological battery (i.e., pre-assessment) consisting of 22 tests covering eight cognitive domains. Then, the experimental group was administered over 4 months a cognitive rehabilitation protocol aimed at improving four cognitive domains by means of eight paper and pencil/computer-based exercises. The control group received guideline-adherent clinical care (i.e., standard of care). At the end of the cognitive treatment, both groups were re-administered the neuropsychological battery (i.e., post-assessment). Additionally, 6 months after post-assessment, the experimental group was given the same neuropsychological battery (i.e., follow up-assessment). In order to test the efficacy of the cognitive rehabilitation protocol, we compared between groups the results of the neuropsychological battery at the pre- and post-assessments. In order to evaluate the stability over time, the effects of the cognitive rehabilitation protocol was examined comparing within the experimental group the results of the neuropsychological battery at post- and follow up-assessments. Our results show that the two groups did not differ at the pre-assessment, but differed at post-assessment. Specifically, the experimental group showed a significant improvement in five domains (Learning and memory, Abstraction/executive functioning, Verbal fluency, Attention/working memory, and Functional), whereas the control group significantly worsened in the same domains. The improvement of the experimental group did not change in the follow up-assessment in two domains (Abstraction/executive functioning, Attention/working memory, and Functional). Overall, these findings support the efficacy and, to some extent, the stability over time of our cognitive rehabilitation protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.