Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34491526›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neuro-oncology2021

Working memory training for adult glioma patients: a proof-of-concept study.

Sarah Ellen Braun, Farah J Aslanzadeh, Autumn Lanoye, Stephanie Fountain-Zaragoza, Mark G Malkin, Ashlee R Loughan

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03323450 (Cognitive Remediation Therapy for Brain Tumor Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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.

NCT03323450 nacompletednot on this map

Cognitive Remediation Therapy for Brain Tumor Patients: Improving Working Memory

TypeinterventionalSponsorVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRan2017 to 2020Enrolled20ConditionsGlioma, Brain Tumor, PrimaryArmsCogMed®
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Neuro-oncology practice · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Sarah Ellen Braun *Department of Neurology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. sarah.braun@vcuhealth.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7184-0125
Farah J Aslanzadeh *Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
Autumn LanoyeMassey Cancer Center, Richmond, VA, USA.
Stephanie Fountain-ZaragozaDepartment of Neurology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Mark G MalkinDepartment of Neurology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
Ashlee R LoughanDepartment of Neurology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.

Funding

Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR002648 · NCATS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI NANASINKAM, SERGE PATRICK, SANYAL, ARUN J · 2018 to 2022
$3.7M
CTSA K12 Program at Virginia Commonwealth UniversityK12TR004364 · NCATS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI SERGE PATRICK NANASINKAM, Gretchen N Neigh · 2023 to 2026
$3.0M
NCATS NIH HHS K12 TR004364NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002648NCATS NIH HHS KL2TR002648VCU School of Medicine Deans Academic Enhancement Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCogMed Working Memory Training (CWMT) is a computer-based program shown to improve working memory (WM) among those with cognitive impairments. No study to date has investigated its feasibility, acceptability, and satisfaction in adult patients with glioma, despite the well-documented incidence of WM impairment in this population.

methodsTwenty patients with glioma and objective and/or perceived WM deficits enrolled in the study: 52% high-grade, 60% female, Mage = 47 (range = 21-72 years). Adverse events were monitored to determine safety. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed based on established metrics. Satisfaction was explored by exit-interviews. Neurocognitive tests and psychological symptoms were analyzed at baseline and post-CWMT to estimate effect sizes.

resultsOf 20 enrolled patients, 16 completed the intervention (80% retention rate). Reasons for withdrawal included time burden (n = 2); tumor-related fatigue (n = 1) or loss to follow-up (n = 1). No adverse events were determined to be study-related. Adherence was 69% with reasons for nonadherence similar to those for study withdrawal. The perceived degree of benefit was only moderate. Baseline to post-CWMT assessments showed medium to large effects on neurocognitive tasks. Psychological symptoms remained stable throughout the study period.

conclusionsCWMT was found to be safe and acceptable in adult patients with glioma. Enrollment, retention rates, and treatment adherence were all adequate and comparable to studies recruiting similar populations. Only moderate perceived benefit was reported despite demonstrated improvements in objectively-assessed WM. This may indicate that the time commitment and intervention intensity (5 weeks of 50-min training sessions on 5 days/week) outweighed the perceived benefits of the program. (Trial Registration Number: NCT03323450 registered on 10/27/2017).

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionGliomaAdultAgedFemaleHumansLearningMaleMemory DisordersMemory, Short-TermMiddle AgedYoung AdultAcceptabilityCogMedCognitive rehabilitationFeasibilityGliomaWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID34491526
PMCPMC9720894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.