ArticleBrain and behavior2021
Predictors of activities of daily living in heathy older adults: Who benefits most from online cognitive training?
Article in Brain and behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of different training characteristics in combined resistance and cognitive training on motor and cognitive performance in older adults: A systematic review.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026Review
- Multidomain intervention for delaying aging in community-dwelling older adults (MIDA): study design and protocol.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Confirmatory factor analysis of the effect of daily-living on the happiness of community-dwelling older adults in Chile.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Working Memory Training Coupled With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Experiment.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Predictors of activities of daily living in heathy older adults: Who benefits most from online cognitive training?Brain and behavior · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the course of activities of daily living (IADL) functioning and possible predictors of performance changes in healthy older adults conducting either a General Cognitive Training (GCT) or a Reasoning Cognitive Training (ReaCT) or no training (control group, CG) over a period of 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. SETTING AND
participantsAn online, home-based GCT and ReaCT including n = 2913 healthy participants (GCT: n = 1096; ReaCT: n = 1022; CG: n = 794) aged 60 years and older.
methodsMultilevel analysis were calculated to explore the nature of our outcome variables of IADL part A (independence) and part B (difficulty of tasks), and to detect possible predictors for participants' performance on IADL after CT.
resultsThe random slopes models fitted better for the outcomes IADL Part B in the GCT group (χ CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION: The particular effectiveness in women is of clinical relevance, as IADL is typically more impaired in women than in men in advanced age. Following a personalized medicine approach, identifying predictors of non-pharmacological intervention success is of utmost importance.
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.