SynthesisAging clinical and experimental research2026
The efficacy of reminiscence therapy on the cognition of older patients with cognitive impairment or dementia: a meta-analysis based on regulatory factors.
Synthesis in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith global aging, dementia prevalence is rising, imposing significant burdens. Reminiscence therapy (RT) shows promise for improving cognition in older adults with cognitive impairment or dementia, but evidence remains inconsistent, potentially moderated by factors like age, intervention frequency, and setting.
aimsThis systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate RT's efficacy on cognitive function in older patients with cognitive impairment or dementia and identify moderating factors through subgroup analyses.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across 11 English and Chinese databases from inception until May 1, 2025, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating RT versus standard care in older adults with cognitive impairment or dementia, utilizing the cognitive outcome. Two independent reviewers screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and evidence quality. Using RevMan 5.4 for meta-analysis and subgroup analysis.
resultsTwenty-four RCTs involving 1,963 patients were included. RT significantly improved cognitive function, with benefits sustained at follow-up. RT also improved memory, reduced depression, and enhanced quality of life, but not executive function. Subgroup analyses revealed significantly greater cognitive improvement in patients aged 60-70 years, with intervention frequencies of 12-16 sessions, and in nursing home settings.
conclusionRT is an effective intervention for improving cognition, memory, depression, and quality of life in older adults with cognitive impairment or dementia. Patient age, intervention frequency, and setting are potential moderators of its cognitive efficacy, providing actionable insights for optimizing clinical RT protocols.
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.