ArticleBrain structure & function2016
Gray matter responsiveness to adaptive working memory training: a surface-based morphometry study.
Article in Brain structure & function, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cortical and subcortical responsiveness to intensive adaptive working memory training: An MRI surface-based analysis.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Brain resilience across the general cognitive ability distribution: Evidence from structural connectivity.Brain structure & function · 2021Article
- Executive Function Training in Childhood Obesity: Food Choice, Quality of Life, and Brain Connectivity (TOuCH): A Randomized Control Trial Protocol.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
- Working Memory Training Effects on White Matter Integrity in Young and Older Adults.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Parallel Changes in Cognitive Function and Gray Matter Volume After Multi-Component Training of Cognitive Control (MTCC) in Adolescents.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2019Article
- Exploration of gray matter correlates of cognitive training benefit in adolescents with chronic traumatic brain injury.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2019Article
- Most evidence for the compensation account of cognitive training is unreliable.Memory & cognition · 2018Article
- Enhancing Intelligence: From the Group to the Individual.Journal of Intelligence · 2018Article
- Brain structural changes following adaptive cognitive training assessed by Tensor-Based Morphometry (TBM).Neuropsychologia · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Here we analyze gray matter indices before and after completing a challenging adaptive cognitive training program based on the n-back task. The considered gray matter indices were cortical thickness (CT) and cortical surface area (CSA). Twenty-eight young women (age range 17-22 years) completed 24 training sessions over the course of 3 months (12 weeks, 24 sessions), showing expected performance improvements. CT and CSA values for the training group were compared with those of a matched control group. Statistical analyses were computed using a ROI framework defined by brain areas distinguished by their genetic underpinning. The interaction between group and time was analyzed. Middle temporal, ventral frontal, inferior parietal cortices, and pars opercularis were the regions where the training group showed conservation of gray matter with respect to the control group. These regions support working memory, resistance to interference, and inhibition. Furthermore, an interaction with baseline intelligence differences showed that the expected decreasing trend at the biological level for individuals showing relatively low intelligence levels at baseline was attenuated by the completed training.
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.