ArticleBMJ open2025
Metacognitive strategies to optimise cognitive and metacognitive abilities among individuals with cognitive communication disorders and neurotypical adults: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strengths and Potential Pitfalls of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Psychiatric Education and Practice.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMetacognitive strategy training is a crucial approach for addressing metacognitive deficits and enhancing metacognitive abilities, which can help mitigate age-related cognitive decline and optimise cognitive functioning. The present scoping review aims to systematically examine and synthesise the existing evidence on metacognitive strategy training programmes designed for both neurotypical adults and individuals with cognitive-communication disorders (CCDs).
designA scoping review following the JBI methodology. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was conducted systematically across PubMed, Embase and Web of Science between June and August 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies involving metacognitive strategy training for neurotypical adults or individuals with CCDs, measuring cognition, communication or metacognitive skills. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened studies in a two-step process, that is, title and abstract screening followed by full-text screening. Data extraction included study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention details and outcome measures.
resultsA total of 32 studies met the selection criteria, revealing diverse metacognitive training approaches that varied in component and dosage. The most frequently used approaches are the Cognitive Orientation to Occupational Performance approach and the Multicontext approach. The reported outcome measures included cognitive outcomes, metacognitive outcomes, well-being measures and feasibility measures. The majority of interventions targeted occupational goals, followed by cognitive skills, with fewer studies addressing cognitive-communicative skills. Studies have focused primarily on individuals with CCDs, with only a few targeting neurotypical adults.
conclusionStudies examining the efficacy of metacognitive strategy training are heterogeneous in terms of population, intervention approaches, and outcome measures. There is significant potential to expand the focus of these interventions to include neurotypical adults, aiming to counteract age-related cognitive-communicative disorders. The limited research within the field of speech-language pathology presents a valuable opportunity for speech-language pathologists to broaden the application of metacognitive strategy training, particularly in enhancing cognitive-communicative abilities.
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.