Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34505555›Full record

Trial reportNeuropsychological rehabilitation2022

A randomized control trial of the effects of home-based online attention training and working memory training on cognition and everyday function in a community stroke sample.

Polly V Peers, Sarah F Punton, Fionnuala C Murphy, Peter Watson, Andrew Bateman, John Duncan, Duncan E Astle, Adam Hampshire, Tom Manly

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neuropsychological rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

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

Polly V PeersMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4470-9508
Sarah F PuntonMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Fionnuala C MurphyMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Peter WatsonMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Andrew BatemanOliver Zangwill Centre, Cambridge Community Services NHS Trust, Ely, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2547-5921
John DuncanMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Duncan E AstleMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Adam HampshireDivision of Brain Sciences, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Tom ManlyMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105559837Medical Research Council MC_U105580448Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/10Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_00030/11Medical Research Council MC_UU_00030/7
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive difficulties are common following stroke and can have widespread impacts on everyday functioning. Technological advances offer the possibility of individualized cognitive training for patients at home, potentially providing a low-cost, low-intensity adjunct to rehabilitation services. Using this approach, we have previously demonstrated post-training improvements in attention and everyday functioning in fronto-parietal stroke patients. Here we examine whether these benefits are observed more broadly in a community stroke sample. Eighty patients were randomized to either 4 weeks of online adaptive attention training (SAT), working memory training (WMT) or waitlist (WL). Cognitive and everyday function measures were collected before and after the intervention, and after 3 months. During training, weekly measures of patients' subjective functioning were collected. The training was well received and compliance good. No differences in our primary end-point, spatial bias, or other cognitive functions were observed. However, on patient-reported outcomes, SAT participants showed greater levels of improvement in everyday functioning than WMT or WL participants. In line with our previous work, everyday functioning improvements were greatest for patients with spatial impairments and those who received SAT training. Whether attention training can be recommended for stroke survivors depends on whether cognitive test performance or everyday functioning is considered more relevant.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationAttentionCognitionCognitive TrainingHumansMemory, Short-TermAttentionCognitive trainingEveryday-functioningRehabilitationStroke

Identifiers

PMID34505555
PMCPMC7615301

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.