Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26635558›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2015

Evaluation of a Cognitive Rehabilitation Protocol in HIV Patients with Associated Neurocognitive Disorders: Efficacy and Stability Over Time.

Alessandro Livelli, Gian Carlo Orofino, Andrea Calcagno, Mariana Farenga, Donatella Penoncelli, Marta Guastavigna, Sinibaldo Carosella, Pietro Caramello, Lorenzo Pia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Cognitive rehabilitation for people with mild to moderate dementia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

9 authors.

Alessandro LivelliDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy ; SpAtial, Motor and Bodily Awareness Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Torino Torino, Italy.
Gian Carlo OrofinoDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Andrea CalcagnoUnit of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Torino Torino, Italy.
Mariana FarengaDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Donatella PenoncelliDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Marta GuastavignaDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Sinibaldo CarosellaDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Pietro CaramelloDivision A of Infectious Diseases, Amedeo of Savoia Hospital Torino, Italy.
Lorenzo PiaSpAtial, Motor and Bodily Awareness Research Group, Department of Psychology, University of Torino Torino, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

cognitive impairmentHANDHIVHIV-associated neurocognitive disordersneurocognitive rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID26635558
PMCPMC4644912

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.