Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32478173›Full record

ReviewDiagnostic and prognostic research2020

Prognostic factors for change in memory test performance after memory training in healthy older adults: a systematic review and outline of statistical challenges.

Mandy Roheger, Ann-Kristin Folkerts, Fabian Krohm, Nicole Skoetz, Elke Kalbe

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Mandy Roheger1Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937 Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6015-3194
Ann-Kristin Folkerts1Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
Fabian Krohm1Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
Nicole Skoetz2Evidence-Based Oncology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
Elke Kalbe1Department of Medical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937 Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe goal is to investigate prognostic factors for change in memory test performance in healthy older adults and to report and discuss the different statistical procedures used for investigating this topic in the literature.

methodsPrognostic factors were here understood as any measures that were investigated to estimate change in memory test performance. MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, CENTRAL, and PsycInfo were searched up to November 2019. Prognostic factor and prognostic factor finding studies investigating prognostic factors on verbal and non-verbal short- and long-term memory after conducting memory training in healthy older adults were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool.

resultsOur search yielded 12,974 results. We included 29 studies that address prognostic factors of change in memory test performance, including sociodemographic, (neuro-)psychological, genetic, and biological parameters. Studies showed high variation and methodological shortcomings with regard to the assessment, statistical evaluation, and reporting of the investigated prognostic factors. Included studies used different types of dependent variables (change scores vs. post-test scores) when defining change in memory test performance leading to contradictory results. Age was the only variable investigated throughout most of the studies, showing that older adults benefit more from training when using the change score as the dependent variable.

conclusionOverall, there is a need for adequate reporting in studies of prognostic factors for change in memory test performance. Because of inconsistencies and methodological shortcomings in the literature, conclusions regarding prognostic factors remain uncertain. As a tentative conclusion, one may say that the higher the age of the participant, the more profound the improvement in memory test performance will be after memory training.

trial registrationCRD42019127479.

Indexed as

Memory trainingPredictionPrognostic factorsVerbal memory

Identifiers

PMID32478173
PMCPMC7240921

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.