ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Language and Communication Interventions in People with Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although language impairment is frequently observed in patients with Alzheimer's disease (pwAD), targeted language rehabilitation is often overlooked. The present study reviews published evidence on the impact of language training, either alone or in combination with cognitive training, on cognitive outcomes in pwAD. A systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane was carried out, including studies published from inception to November 2023. A total of eight research articles (four randomized controlled trials and four observational studies) met the inclusion criteria: six assessed language training combined with cognitive training and two evaluated language rehabilitation alone. Regarding language and non-language (mainly memory, attention, and executive functions) outcomes, there was a consensus among studies that language rehabilitation (alone or in combination with cognitive training) yields positive results. Some of the articles also explored the impact on patients' and their caregivers' quality of life, with all but one showing improvement. Consequently, the combination of language and cognitive training leads to improvements across various cognitive domains. However, limited evidence supports the value of sole language rehabilitation. This conclusion is influenced by heterogeneity among studies (different types and duration of interventions, small participant sets, various assessment tools), and, thus, further research is warranted.
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.