Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39882355›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2024

A systematic review of cognitive telerehabilitation in patients with cognitive dysfunction.

Hyeonwoo Jeon, Doo Young Kim, Si-Woon Park, Bum-Suk Lee, Hyeong-Wook Han, Namo Jeon, Minsong Kim, Mingu Kang, Suebeen Kim

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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.

Hyeonwoo JeonDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Doo Young KimDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Si-Woon ParkDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Bum-Suk LeeDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Hyeong-Wook HanDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Namo JeonDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Minsong KimDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Mingu KangDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, International St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Suebeen KimInternational St. Mary's Hospital, Catholic Kwandong University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: One of the possible treatment options for patient with cognitive dysfunction is cognitive telerehabilitation. Previous systematic reviews on cognitive telerehabilitation have focused on specific disease groups and the analysis of intervention methods did not differentiate between traditional face-to-face cognition treatment and usual care. In this systematic review, we aim to analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare telerehabilitation with face-to-face treatment or usual care for improving cognitive function in elderly individuals with cognitive dysfunction or patients with acquired brain injury. Methods: We conducted this systematic review following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). In this systematic review, we searched 7 electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, EMbase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, KMbase) to identify relevant studies published through December 10, 2024. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the quality of the studies and synthesize the evidence. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method. Results: Finally, 16 studies were included in the analysis. For comparing telerehabilitation with face-to-face cognition treatment, the meta-analysis included 2 RCTs for global cognition (immediate outcome), 2 RCTs for attention (immediate outcome), 2 RCTs for visuospatial function (immediate outcome). For comparing telerehabilitation with usual care, the meta-analysis included 7 RCTs for global cognition (immediate outcome), 3 RCTs for global cognition (persistence outcome), 4 RCTs for attention (immediate outcome), 3 RCTs for executive function (immediate outcome), 3 RCTs for working memory (immediate outcome), 3 RCTs for visuospatial function (immediate outcome). Discussion: Telerehabilitation has been shown to be more effective than usual care in improving global cognitive function, and its effectiveness is not inferior to that of traditional face-to-face cognitive treatment. By overcoming the limitations of traditional cognition rehabilitation and providing continuous treatment, telerehabilitation can offer effective treatment in specific situations.

Indexed as

cognitive dysfunctioncognitive remediationhealth services accessibilityneurodegenerative diseasestelerehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID39882355
PMCPMC11774910

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.