Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27148026›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016

Barriers, Benefits, and Beliefs of Brain Training Smartphone Apps: An Internet Survey of Younger US Consumers.

John Torous, Patrick Staples, Elizabeth Fenstermacher, Jason Dean, Matcheri Keshavan

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. What Do People Expect of Cognitive Enhancement?Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John TorousDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston, MA, USA.
Patrick StaplesDepartment of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health Boston, MA, USA.
Elizabeth FenstermacherDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston, MA, USA.
Jason DeanDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston, MA, USA.
Matcheri KeshavanDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

GRADUATE TRAINING IN BIOSTATISTICST32ES007142 · NIEHS · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI Brent Andrew Coull · 1985 to 2026
$11.9M
NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES007142
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile clinical evidence for the efficacy of brain training remains in question, numerous smartphone applications (apps) already offer brain training directly to consumers. Little is known about why consumers choose to download these apps, how they use them, and what benefits they perceive. Given the high rates of smartphone ownership in those with internet access and the younger demographics, we chose to approach this question first with a general population survey that would capture primarily this demographic.

methodWe conducted an online internet-based survey of the US population via mTurk regarding their use, experience, and perceptions of brain training apps. There were no exclusion criteria to partake although internet access was required. Respondents were paid 20 cents for completing each survey. The survey was offered for a 2-week period in September 2015.

results3125 individuals completed the survey and over half of these were under age 30. Responses did not significantly vary by gender. The brain training app most frequently used was Lumosity. Belief that a brain-training app could help with thinking was strongly correlated with belief it could also help with attention, memory, and even mood. Beliefs of those who had never used brain-training apps were similar to those who had used them. Respondents felt that data security and lack of endorsement from a clinician were the two least important barriers to use. DISCUSSION: RESULTS suggest a high level of interest in brain training apps among the US public, especially those in younger demographics. The stability of positive perception of these apps among app-naïve and app-exposed participants suggests an important role of user expectations in influencing use and experience of these apps. The low concern about data security and lack of clinician endorsement suggest apps are not being utilized in clinical settings. However, the public's interest in the effectiveness of apps suggests a common theme with the scientific community's concerns about direct to consumer brain training programs.

Indexed as

appsbrainmemorysmartphonestechnology assessment

Identifiers

PMID27148026
PMCPMC4837324

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.