Trial reportCognitive processing2025
A feasibility pilot study comparing tablets and smartphones for an app-based speed training program in older people: an open-label, randomized controlled PROBE trial.
Trial report in Cognitive processing, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This feasibility pilot study examined whether the device type (tablet or smartphone) influences the effectiveness of a brain training program for older adults. Forty-four community-dwelling participants were randomly assigned to the tablet or smartphone group using a stratified block randomisation protocol based on age and sex. Each participant completed 12 supervised training sessions, each lasting approximately 40 min, over 3 to 4 months. Cognitive assessments included general intelligence, attention, memory, and executive function. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the effects of the device type and time (pre- vs. post-intervention). Of the 44 participants, 36 completed the program. No main or interaction effects were observed for device type. However, significant improvements over time were found in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices, Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test, Frontal Assessment Battery, time required to complete Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices, visual cancellation, and Trail-Making Test Part A. These results suggest comparable near-transfer benefits in attention and executive functions across tablets and smartphones. However, neither device produced far-transfer gains in memory measures. These findings underscore the feasibility and potential cost-effectiveness of smartphone-based training interventions for supporting cognitive health in later life.Trial Registration: Registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry on October 15, 2020 (UMIN000042123).
Indexed as
Identifiers
40048071What 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.