ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Mobile Gaming for Cognitive Health in Older Adults: A Scoping Review of App Store Applications.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundMobile gaming applications are increasingly marketed as cognitive training tools for older adults, yet their scientific validity and accessibility remain uncertain. This scoping review evaluates their effectiveness and inclusivity.
methodsA systematic search of the Apple App Store and Google Play Store identified 227 applications, with 14 meeting inclusion criteria. Apps were assessed for scientific validity, theoretical foundation, accessibility, cognitive targeting, user engagement, and monetization models.
resultsWhile all 14 apps claimed cognitive benefits, only one cited empirical research. None included baseline cognitive assessments or progress tracking. Accessibility was limited-eight apps had visual accommodations, but none provided auditory support. Six apps were English-only, restricting linguistic inclusivity. Monetization varied, with eight requiring in-app purchases or subscriptions, posing financial barriers.
conclusionsThis review highlights critical gaps in the current cognitive gaming application market for older adults. Despite their popularity, cognitive training apps for older adults lack scientific validation and accessibility, limiting their effectiveness as cognitive interventions. Developers should integrate evidence-based training, adaptive assessments, and inclusive accessibility features such as voice guidance and multilingual support. Future research should prioritize longitudinal studies to assess real-world efficacy, refine interventions targeting memory, executive function, and processing speed, and enhance inclusive design for diverse aging populations.
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.