Abstract
This article presents a systematic review of studies on cognitive training programs based on artificial cognitive systems and digital technologies and their effect on executive functions. The aim has been to identify which populations have been studied, the characteristics of the implemented programs, the types of implemented cognitive systems and digital technologies, the evaluated executive functions, and the key findings of these studies. The review has been carried out following the PRISMA protocol; five databases have been selected from which 1889 records were extracted. The articles were filtered following established criteria, to give a final selection of 264 articles that have been used for the purposes of this study in the analysis phase. The findings showed that the most studied populations were school-age children and the elderly. The most studied executive functions were working memory and attentional processes, followed by inhibitory control and processing speed. Many programs were commercial, customizable, gamified, and based on classic tasks. Some more recent initiatives have begun to incorporate user-machine interfaces, robotics, and virtual reality, although studies on their effects remain scarce. The studies recognize multiple benefits of computerized neuropsychological stimulation and rehabilitation programs for executive functions in different age groups, but there is a lack of studies in specific population sectors and with more rigorous research designs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The digital technological advances of the last decades have driven significant transformations in health services for all populations, including neuropsychological care programs. Currently, it is recognized that many rehabilitation and cognitive stimulation programs have incorporated digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. These programs, in general, have promoted new lines of action toward understanding and capitalizing on the human–computer interaction at the service of the neuropsychological health.
Multiple perspectives have been developed for the incorporation of digital technologies and cognitive systems in rehabilitation and neurocognitive stimulation, such as serious games for health, digital mental health interventions, computer training based on restitution, apps based on the brain-computer interface, virtual reality cognitive training, rehabilitation software, among others. In general, in this systematic review, the programs have been grouped under the concept of computer-based cognitive training (hereinafter referred to as CCT), and we were particularly interested in the rehabilitation and stimulation of executive functions.
1.1 Executive Functions
The term “executive functions” (hereinafter referred to as EFs) refer to a diversity of cognitive hypotheses of processes carried out by prefrontal areas of the brain [12]. They refer to a series of neurological functions and higher-order cognitive abilities that allow for the sophisticated processing of input information, making it possible to plan, organize, guide, review, flexible, regularize, and evaluate the behavior to achieve goals. In conclusion, they constitute critical cognitive control mechanisms to self-regulate future-oriented behavior and adapt to the changing demands of the environment [13].
Currently, there are multiple theoretical models from which this construct is conceptualized, and each investigation takes the side of the one that best fits its epistemological current. Some models contemplate this process in a unified way, under executive function, central executive, executive control, or cognitive functioning [14,15,16], referring to regulating, coordinating, and directing cognitive, affective, and behavioral processes. Other theoretical models implement the concept of executive functions pluralistically and discriminate between a series of higher-order cognitive processes that have an intimate interaction with each other and with the most basic cognitive processes [17,18,19]. The classification of executive functions does not enjoy consensus in the academic community either; Goldstein [12] recognizes at least 30 classifications, making this concept difficult to define operationally. However, there is general agreement concerning three central nuclei of EFs: inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility, following the hierarchical model proposed by Miyake [17]. The above central nuclei emerge from others of a higher order, such as reasoning, problem solving, and planning.
1.2 Cognitive Computational Training
Neuropsychological intervention programs can be divided into two branches: stimulation and rehabilitation [20]. Rehabilitation is focused on people who have lost a certain level of performance in their executive functioning, either due to a neurodevelopmental condition, acquired neurological damage, neurological deterioration, or as a consequence of a pathology. Rehabilitation seeks to reestablish the subject’s situation to the highest possible level of functioning [21], under the principles of restitution, compensation, and substitution [22]. Cognitive stimulation, for its part, seeks to establish new learning under the premise that the subject has not acquired it yet. Therefore, it seeks to contribute to the occurrence of transformations in the nervous system facilitated by its neuroplasticity [20]. Stimulation comprises activities to improve general cognitive performance or some of its cognitive processes in particular [23] based on principles of transfer and generalization. For this research, both types of rehabilitation and stimulation programs will be grouped under “cognitive training.”
The literature on the subject suggests that clinical trials and other types of cognitive training studies should design or select training programs based on solid theoretical references and start from a neuropsychological evaluation exercise. It also highlights the need for intervention schemes to be process-oriented rather than task training [24]. This allows for a near-transfer effect (improvement in untrained tasks that measure the same cognitive component) and far transfer effect (improvement in untrained tasks that measure related cognitive components).
Currently, studies seek to advance to programs that, in addition to improving target cognitive processes, improve their neurological bases, by producing reorganization in brain structure and functioning [20]. For this reason, other measurement options have begun to be incorporated in addition to standardized neuropsychological values, including neuroimaging alternatives such as functional magnetic resonance imaging, event-related potentials, and an electroencephalogram. The findings on the overall effects of training and transfer provide researchers with new possibilities for the application of their findings, beyond clinical settings, to similar situations such as education [25].
One of the first initiatives to use computer systems in cognitive training programs has been the digitization of activities that were classically carried out through pencil and paper exercises [26, 27]. Also, there has been a rise in the gamification of activities, which has had such positive results that it paved the way for the creation of serious games, specifically designed for clinical or educational purposes [28,29,30].
Regarding the neurorehabilitation and stimulation of executive functions, nowadays, it is possible to find numerous computerized cognitive training programs that use software, applications, and online platforms. These programs offer significant advantages to health professionals, including having an extensive repository of activities, providing tools for planning sessions, designing personalized programs, providing feedback to the participant, and monitoring the patient's progress. On the other hand, the use of machine learning algorithms has optimized data processing and collection and has made possible the adaptation of activities to the needs and progress of each patient [31, 32].
Another benefit of the CCT is access to programs from multiple devices, such as computers, tablets, and smartphones; this has improved affordability for patients and has made it possible to overcome logistical and geographical limitations; the advantages of multidevice access have become evident during the health emergency caused by COVID-19 [5, 6]. The biosafety measures that implemented to counteract the pandemic, such as social distancing and lockdown, and the lack of availability of mental health professionals, have formulated new challenges to neuropsychological care programs. Digital technologies have provided alternative solutions to these challenges, which has led them to grow in popularity.
Among other technological innovations in cognitive training programs, it is possible to find the design of augmented reality and virtual reality resources [33,34,35,36], the incorporation of robotic devices [5, 32, 37], the design of new devices and interventions that integrate brain-computer interfaces, such as neurofeedback [10, 30, 38], as well as new high-tech interventions such as transcranial direct current stimulation [39, 40].
In response to this phenomenon, there has been an increase in the studies evaluating the feasibility, adherence, and effects of computerized cognitive training programs on executive functions [9, 41,42,43]. However, despite the potential of these programs, there have been repeated inconsistencies in the findings of the systematic reviews of clinical trials in this area [25, 44].
Concerning the target populations of the programs, some findings restrict their effectiveness to early ages or older adults [45]. However, other studies position these technologies among the new means of cognitive training which help achieve long-lasting, although with different degrees of efficiency [25]. Some recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have compiled clinical trials and experimental studies to account for the effects of different computer-based cognitive training programs. Three systematic reviews compiled more than 101 randomized clinical trials (from now on RCTs) in children with ADHD that implemented different CCT modalities such as serious games, virtual reality, and neurofeedback [7, 46, 47]; a large part of these interventions demonstrated a favorable effect on executive functions such as working memory, attention, planning, inhibition and self-regulation.
A systematic review of gamification-based digital mental health interventions [8] identified favorable effects on executive functioning in children with other neurodevelopmental disorders, with other benefits in terms of engagement, usability, and mental health gap reduction. Another review that compiled the effects of programs based on brain-computer interface devices [30] found a positive impact on EFs of attention and working memory, as well as on visuospatial, social, and emotional skills of children with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism and ADHD.
A systematic review of 19 RCTs in children and adolescents with autism found that, in general, the implementation of CCT shows more significant improvements in executive functions compared to treatment as usual, with carry-over effects on social skills [44]; however, these interventions in children with intellectual disabilities have been poorly studied [48]. In children with typical neurodevelopment, a systematic review of 16 RCTs found that CCTs demonstrated effects of near transfer to working memory and far transfer to inhibitory control and attention [49]. Meanwhile, another review of 15 studies found that, in general, the transfer effects of these programs to executive functions are limited [50].
Regarding the adult population, a systematic review compiled nine studies that evaluated the effects of a CCT based on virtual reality in patients with various neuropsychological disorders; the authors found improvements in executive function and attention associated with the intervention, with effects on motivation and adherence to treatment [51]. In adults with depression, a meta-analysis including nine studies [3] found that CCTs had moderate to strong effects on WM, attention, and global cognitive functioning while reducing depressive symptoms.
Some systematic reviews of computer-based cognitive remediation programs in adults with schizophrenia have been shown to have favorable effects on working memory and social cognition [52], while other reviews in this population did not acknowledge conclusive results [2]. CCTs have also been shown to be feasible for strengthening executive functioning in healthy adults, also proving to be easily incorporated in the workplace [53].
The elderly population has also been one of the age groups in which CCTs have been most investigated to prevent or delay cognitive deterioration in neurodegenerative disorders associated with aging. However, some reviews have found a lack of interdisciplinary consensus and instead there is a continuous debate about the benefits of these programs [25, 54], as well as a lack of consensus when defining a taxology of the cognitive domains studied [9].
A systematic review of 20 studies in healthy older adults found that much of the evaluated CCT effects were limited to trained or near-transfer tasks. However, other studies incorporating diagnostic imaging found structural improvements evidenced by cortical and gray matter increases, changes in subcortical and frontal activation after training; the authors concluded that executive function training with CCT may reduce dependence on compensatory neural mechanisms [53].
In patients with acquired brain injury, a review of 23 studies reported significant improvements in attention and executive function following training [1]. In older adults with depression, a meta-analysis [55] found that commercial virtual reality games improved cognitive function, memory and decreased depressive symptoms.
In adults with mild cognitive impairment, a review of 22 studies found significant effects on global cognitive function, attention, executive function, and memory [55]. Another review in this population [35] assessed the efficacy of 16 computer-based and virtual reality programs, with most studies showing improvements in attention, executive function, and visual and verbal memory. Both reviews found that these interventions also decrease symptoms of depression and anxiety. A meta-analysis of 16 RCT trials looked at CCT programs that incorporated serious games in older adults with cognitive impairment, most of these demonstrating significant improvement in cognitive function [11].
In older adults with a history of stroke, a meta-analysis reviewed the effect of virtual reality rehabilitation from 21 studies, which demonstrated improvements in executive functions and changes in evoked potentials that showed a positive effect of the intervention [36]. Other reviews recognized transfer effects on working memory [4], attention and executive functions, and neural changes in both functional and structural connectivity in brain areas related to executive functioning [45]; however, both reviews noted that the results were very heterogeneous between studies [4, 45].
A large part of the systematic reviews found limitations in these studies associated with the lack of methodological rigor, the lack of blinding of the participants and evaluators, diversity in the measurement instruments, and poor replication of the intervention protocols [7, 25, 35, 44,45,46,47,48, 51]. Variability in designs, instruments, and protocols limited the performance of other meta-analyses [11, 35, 45]. Some authors point out that the results of the studies should be taken with moderation and could require new researches [11, 45, 51]. Other authors also warn of the limitations to the application of these programs, especially in developing countries, such as the lack of technological infrastructure, access to quality networks, and sociocultural adaptability [8].
The systematic reviews and meta-analyses carried out to date on this topic have provided a general overview of the benefits and limitations of incorporating digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems into rehabilitation and neuropsychological stimulation programs in different populations. However, the effects that CCTs have shown on executive functions have been so diverse that they cannot be conclusive. To date, studies that analyze the differences in use and scope of this type of intervention according to the group population and age range have not been found.
With the current systematic review, a systematic compilation of the experimental and quasi-experimental studies in which the use of the CCT has been evaluated in different populations and clinical groups was carried out in order to provide an overview of the current state of the studies on the topic and to account for the populations that have been studied, the type of the implemented digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems, the characteristics of the interventions, the studied executive functions, and the most significant effects. Besides, an assessment has been made of the main benefits of the use of artificial intelligence and computational systems in neuropsychological intervention programs, and challenges to be addressed in the future, have been identified.
2 Methods
The systematic review (SR) research methodology aims to collect, evaluate, and analyze representative studies in a specific field of knowledge. It aims to provide a clear and structured summary of information in response to a specific question [56]. Although SRs have been initially used in health sciences to try to answer questions related to treatment, diagnosis, or prognosis [57], their validity is currently recognized in other areas of knowledge such as engineering [58]. SRs have a rigorous methodology that includes structuring a straightforward question, systematic and exhaustive search of all potentially relevant articles, selection by explicit and reproducible criteria of articles to be included, the description of the design and execution of the original studies, the synthesis of the obtained data and the interpretation of the results [56]. The systematic review protocol PRISMA-Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyzes [59], proposed by Cochrane Collaboration [57, 60], has been followed in the present study.
2.1 Research Question Formulation
The purpose of this systematic review has been to identify the studies that have been carried out in the last five years on cognitive training programs for EFs based on digital technologies. By examining the use of artificial cognitive systems applied in programs for the stimulation and rehabilitation of executive cognitive processes, the study contributes to state of the art and distinguishes the populations, contexts, type of technologies, uses, and characteristics of said programs. The PICO model proposed by the Cochrane Collaboration was implemented to consolidate the review question [61]. This model plans that the question should be focused on four aspects: the patient or the problem being treated (P), the intervention or exposure being considered (I), the intervention comparison, when relevant (C) and clinical outcomes of interest (O) (see Table 1).
One of the purposes of the PICO model is to define the general concepts or theoretical categories of work that act as axes on which the review is structured and that are, therefore, critical when defining the research questions. These theoretical categories of work are: (1) Executive Function; (2) Computarized Cognitive Training. The research questions guiding the systematic review were formulated from the PICO analysis (Table 2).
2.2 Definition of the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
For this study, the researchers selected the following interdisciplinary databases: Science Direct (DB1), Scopus (DB2), ProQuest (DB3), Springer (DB4), and PubMed (DB5). The criteria for selecting or rejecting the articles to be included in the systematic review were: (1) articles published in the selected databases; (2) articles that present results of clinical trials, experimental studies, quasi-experimental studies; (3) the studies that evaluate the effect of a CCT on the executive functions of a group of subjects; (4) documents published from 2015 to the date of execution of the search (July 2021). The established exclusion criteria were: (1) short articles that do not present either results, protocols, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews; (2) studies on cognitive training programs that are not based on computer systems; and (3) studies not assessing executive functions.
2.3 Search Strategy Execution
On the basis of the research questions, the terms mainly used in the literature on the subject were established as the keywords with which the search string was built. These keywords were collated in two thesauri: ERIC, a tool for standardized terms in education and health, and IEEE, which provides a controlled vocabulary for the engineering area. Once the appropriate keywords had been selected for the search, several complete query strings were built, complemented with logical operators. The syntax had to be modified to adapt to the particularities of each database (See “Appendix A”).
“Executive function” OR "executive functions" AND “cognitive training” OR “cognitive rehabilitation” AND Computerized OR “Based-computer”
In order to analyze the most recent results, the search was limited to articles published from 2015 to the present (cut-off date July 2020).
2.4 Study Selection and Filter Application
The execution of the search strings yielded a total of 1889 records distributed in the different databases. Once the search string was executed, the articles were reviewed on the basis of the criteria defined for their search. After filtering the title, abstract and full text, in the final phase of the review, 264 articles were selected for analysis. The flow diagram, PRISMA [59], presented in Fig. 1 describes the procedure carried out throughout the different phases of the systematic review.
3 Results
RQ1
What is the current status of studies on the effects of CCTs on executive functions?
Although the review only included articles reviewed in the last 5 years, sustained increase has been evident over the last decade, which is a reflection of the great acceptability of CCTs.
According to the georeferencing of the studies (Fig. 2), 46.6% were carried out in Europe, distributed in 22 countries of the continent, where Spain stood out, with 7.6% of the total studies, followed by Italy and Germany with 5.7%, respectively. 37.9% of the studies has been carried out in America, 30.7% belonged to the United States, while out of the remaining 7.2%, only 2.7% took place in South America. Asia has 12.5%, of which 4.9% were carried out in China. In lower percentages, studies were also found in Oceania (4.9%) and Africa (0.8%).
All the studies included in the final sample had an experimental or quasi-experimental methodological design. 18.2% corresponded to preliminary studies such as pilot, exploratory, feasibility studies, and proofs of concept, while 81.8% were intervention studies; the majority were randomized controlled trials, some were clinical superiority trials, and non-randomized controlled trials single group, or crossover diagnostic trials. All studies included at least two measurement cuts in pre and post-tests, but only 26.9% included post-test follow-up tests. 89% of the studies were controlled, 58.8% had a two-group design (training group and control group), 21.2% had three groups, 8.3% had four, and 2.3% had more than five. 56.6% implemented active control groups, 34% passive controls, and 9.4% included at least one passive and one active control group. Group allocation was random in most studies (82.9%), and in the minority were pseudo-random (1.5%) or by convenience (2.3%) (Table 3).
The participants' mean number was 37.3 in the preliminary studies and 89.6 in the intervention studies. When analyzing the distribution by percentiles, 75% of the preliminary studies had a sample less than 49.7 and in the intervention studies less than 99 subjects (Table 4). The mean group size also varied depending on whether the study was preliminary (20.5) or whether it was an intervention.
RQ2
What are the population groups in which CCTs have been investigated?
The results showed that 59.1% of the studies were carried out in the clinical population and 40.9 in the healthy population. However, this proportion varied when crossing this variable with the age group. In Table 5 and Fig. 3, descriptive statistics of the total of the studies are presented by age groups, and it is distinguished how many were carried out on a population with a clinical diagnosis and involved healthy subjects.
In the general sample, a higher frequency of jobs was observed in older adults (29.2%) and school-age children (26.9%). Most of the investigations carried out with older adults, middle adults, and preschoolers regarded clinical populations, while those that involved school children, adolescents, and young adults were carried out on healthy populations.
Figure 3 shows the clinical conditions in which the effects of ACS-based EF cognitive training programs have been most studied.
In school-age and adolescence, neurodevelopmental disorders were more frequent (59.3% and 23.5%), including attention deficit disorder, autism, and cognitive disability. In young adults, although the healthy population has been studied more (74.6%), 11.5% of the investigations were carried out in patients with depressive disorders. In the average adult, 22% of the studies were conducted on patients with schizophrenia and 16.9% with multiple sclerosis. In older adults, 26.4% were patients with neurocognitive disorders, such as mild cognitive impairment, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, o neurocognitive disorders associated with stroke (14.3%).
RQ3
Which EFs showed significative effects after the application of CCTs?
One of the biggest challenges when it came to operationalizing the results of this SR, was to differentiate the executive cognitive processes studied. The term executive functions refer to a theoretical construct associated with cognitive processes of a complex nature, interconnected with other processes and difficult to differentiate, which does not have a unified concept or classification and which, on the contrary, has resulted in multiple explanatory theoretical models.
Fig. 4 shows the frequency of works discriminated by cognitive domain and age group, some of the studies (17.8%) started from models that assume executive function, executive control, or cognitive functioning, as a process unified cognitive function related to the ability to regulate different cognitive, behavioral and affective processes [14, 16]. Another section of the articles (14.4%) took sides with models that assume the concept of “executive functions” in a plural way [17,18,19], without making an explicit differentiation of each subfunction. Although some studies conceptualize general and nonspecific domains such as cognitive control and self-regulation, these were shown in a much lower proportion (3% & 1.6%).
Most of the articles addressed some EFs in a differentiated and independent way. One of the most approached models was Miyake [17], which differentiates inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility as the three central nuclei of EF. Some of the most approached executive functions in research: working memory in 63.3% of the works, inhibitory control in 18.2% and cognitive flexibility in 14.4%. Although they were less frequent (3.5%), some studies showed special interest in the mechanisms of emotional and behavioral regulation, following the EF model of Zelazo [19], who classify EF as cold, or cognitive and hot, or emotional.
Some studies were based on theoretical models that integrate attentional processes within EFs [15, 62, 63], sometimes under the concept of attentional control or executive attention or as one subdomain of attention such as divided, sustained, alternating, selective, among others. 38.3% of the studies addressed attentional processes as an individual component or discriminated by their subdomains.
Other executive functions such as processing speed were included in 18.2% of the investigations; the capacities of planning and cognitive organization in 6.8% of the studies; problem solving in 4.2% and verbal fluency in 3.5%. To a lesser extent, they also presented other cognitive domains usually integrated within the framework of other more general EFs: such as decision making, monitoring of objectives, and metacognitive strategies. All these were present in 1.2% of the studies. Secondary measures other than executive functions such as memory, such as episodic, procedural, verbal, or spatial memory, were also included in some studies (18.2%).
The comparative of population groups shows trends related to the characteristics of the development of each age group. 80% of the works in preschool children studied working memory (WM), and the remaining 40% studied the inhibitory control and planning skills. In school children, this constant was also maintained: WM was the most frequent (67.6%), followed by attention (35.2) and inhibitory control (32.4). In adolescents, WM was also highlighted (64.7%), together with attention (47.1%) and cognitive flexibility (41.2%). WM (74.3) and attention (20%) in young adults. In average adults, WM (61%), attention (47.5), other memory domains (37.3), and processing speed (35.6). In older adults, WM (54.5), attention (41.6), executive functioning (29.9), and other memory domains (24.7).
Although TM was the most studied EF in most populations, other EFs, such as verbal fluency (VF), were exclusively investigated in older adults. This cognitive domain is attributed to a late development that reaches its greatest evolution in adulthood [20], which is why it is understandable that it is not addressed in the early stages. In addition, VF is one of the processes with greater affectation in the cognitive deterioration that appear in advanced ages. In this same sense, processes such as processing speed and decision making were more frequent in young and middle adulthood, processes that are usually altered by neurological damage at these ages, while inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and attention, which have accelerated and key development in childhood and adolescence and are usually more affected in neurodevelopmental disorders, were more found in works at these ages.
RQ4
What are the characteristics of the studied CCTs?
The interventions ranged from 1 to 40 weeks, mean of 7.89 weeks. The sessions ranged from 1 to 18 sessions per week, with an average of 3.4 sessions per week and 22.5 sessions (Table 6). The duration of each session ranged from 5 to 180 min; sessions lasted between 20 and 45 min in 48.1% of the studies and between 46 and 60 min in 17.4%. Based on their findings, most researchers suggested that the sessions should not last longer than 45 min.
The evolution of artificial cognitive systems has brought numerous novelties to traditional cognitive stimulation and rehabilitation programs. These innovations include complementary programs from home, remote access to platforms and activities, and venturing into gamified, adaptive programs supported with augmented reality mechanisms, virtual reality [33, 34], or robotics [64]. Some included two or more training programs; therefore, from among the 264 articles reviewed, 279 programs were identified, a figure referring to the total of the programs mentioned in all the investigations, although some were implemented in more than one study. Each paper was coded with a number and listed to facilitate the presentation of the findings; “Appendices B and C” provide a complete list of the details of each study.
More than half (56.2%) of the analyzed programs were composed of gamified activities, some based on the concept of serious games, a term incorporated by Abt [65] to refer to games designed for educational purposes and not for entertainment and that has gained tremendous popularity in recent decades in educational and clinical settings, which has given rise to trends such as "serious games for health." Twelve programs (4.3%) based on augmented reality or virtual reality paradigms were also identified, such as V-Gait, Reh @ City v2.0, Rehabilitation Gaming System (RGS), Systemic Lisbon Battery (SLB), BrightBrainer, Job simulator, NeuroDRIVE, Carnetsoft, Tano and LongGood, SeeMe, V-Gait, Thera Prax, which, in addition to making use of traditional devices (computer, tablet or smartphone), incorporated the use of other devices such as 3D glasses, controllers and simulators, and one of the programs (0.4%), supported by robotics, called Bee-Bot from ER-Lab Trainingrobot. 9.3% of the programs sought to guarantee ecological validity by incorporating activities related to the subject's daily life instead of exercises with arbitrary content. In addition to the intervention, 10% of the implemented programs also had assessment batteries for different cognitive domains.
Regardless of the design and type of activities, 43% of the programs emphasized the adaptive development of the activities so that the level of complexity of the exercises progressively advanced as the subject showed progress in their execution or leveled their level of difficulty to match the participant's baseline skills.
57.7% of the studies evaluated intervention programs supported by recognized commercial, technological resources, some of them available on web platforms, software, or multidevice apps; among them, the most common were: Cogmed (10%), Brain HQ (6,5%), Lumosity (4,7%), Rehacom (3,6%), ThinkRx (1,8%), Mind Frontiers (1,4%), Happyneurompro (1,4%), Captain´s Log (1,4%), Activate (1,4%), SMART (1,1%), and more detail in “Appendix A”. Other commercial programs that were part of the studies, although less frequently, were: BrainGymmer, SeeMe, Bee-Bot de ER-Lab Trainingrobot, Better Cognition: Bettercog, Brain Age, BrainQuest, CIRCuiTS, Brainer1, Cognifit, Cogniplus, Cogpack, Comcog, Curb Your Addiction, Neuroracer, Fruit ninja, Job simulator, Jungle Memory, Kroko, Neuronation, NeuroPersonalTrainer, Peak, Plan-It Commander, Posit Science Insight, Power-Afa, PSSCogRehab, Reh @ City v2.0, Rehabilitation Gaming System, RGS, Robot factory, driving simulation with virtual reality, NeuroDRIVE, Star Wars Battlefront, StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty.
Another proportion of the programs (35.5%) was non-commercial, some designed by university research departments or by a design and programming agency; under the researchers' indications, only 2.5% of the works implemented open access digital resources, 3.6% of institutional clinical programs and only two studies (0.7%) were designed by public entities.
16.5% of the non-commercial programs were based on classic tasks of great recognition and trajectory that implement paradigms to evaluate certain cognitive domains, the most frequent being the n-Back task, among others such as the Go-No go task, the Flanker task, Corsi task, Stroop task, and task change among others. 2.9% were based on previous works programs, 3.6% based on video games (3,6%) such as Alien game, Jungle Memory, Brain game Brian, Watermon, AYCET—All You Can ET, SLB—Systemic Lisbon Battery, Stop & think, Gwakkamole, Magic memory, among others, to which no name was assigned. Less frequently were programs based on instrumental activities of daily living, goal management, web-enabled conversational interactions, TAPAT—Alert Training, ACT—Computerized Auditory Cognitive Training, ECAT, Advanced Contingent Gaze Attention Training, MRCC—Cognitive control multicomponent training, TALI—Attention and learning training initiative, procedural TM training.
Some studies evaluated the efficacy of multimodal programs, in which ACS-based cognitive training was combined with other programs, such as physical training (5.4%), transcranial direct current (1.1%), neurofeedback training (2.2%), meditation and yoga (1.5%), coaching (0.7%) and acupuncture (0.4%).
RQ5
What are the effects on the EF shown by the CCT and their differences by age group?
The results of the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reviewed found multiple effects in interventions based on digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems; these effects were different depending on the variables evaluated, the purposes of the clinical trial, the type of program implemented, design characteristics, sample sizes, and population characteristics. However, all shed light for future research and the design of interventions that have greater feasibility and seek better effects in the cognitive domains to be trained.
3.1 School Children and Preschoolers
Most studies on preschool and school children determined CCT had moderate to significant effects. In preschool children, a non-commercial program based on the n-back task described effects on working memory and fluid intelligence maintained at 12-month follow-up [27]. Another non-commercial intervention based on the Corsi block task checked for improvements in visual-spatial WM with transfer to task learning [66]. The educational robotics intervention Bee-Bot from ER Lab Trainingrobot improved visuospatial WM and inhibition processes [64]. The Fruit Ninja video game, based on the Go/No go task, improved inhibitory control, transferring to WM and fluid intelligence; electroencephalography (EEG) results indicated an effect on N2; thus, the researchers conclude that response inhibition training appears to potentially improve reasoning ability [67].
The programs investigated in healthy school-age children showed significant improvements in different cognitive domains (Fig. 5), in EF as a general construct [68,69,70], or in their specific sub-processes such as WM [66, 71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79], inhibition [63, 80,81,82], interference control [83], attention [71, 84,85,86], fluid intelligence [75], decision making [85].
A CCT based on classic N-back tasks showed improvements in WM, some with distant transfer to fluid intelligence [75], while others without it [77]. The gamified ThinRx interference control training program demonstrated a distant transfer effect of response inhibition, but it was not maintained at a 3-month follow-up [87]. Cogmed's Robomemo children's version showed better effects on WM when performed in conjunction with training in metacognitive strategy [72]. The non-commercial Nexxo training program, along with self-instructional training (goal setting and planning), was found to help improve EF in children with difficulties in performing inhibition and vigilance tasks [80, 88].
The CCT APRENDO, designed to train WM and attentional control, found that children with lower scores in the pretest showed more significant improvements in the post-test [71]; this is consistent with other studies that affirm that cognitive training has better effects on children with deficits in their cognitive domains than in typically developing children [89]. This finding shows, on the one hand, that cognitive training will not raise the level of EFs above the child's developmental level, however, it will provide learning opportunities and stimulating experiences for children with deficits in their EFs. Some studies found that children with low socioeconomic status (SES) had a reduced performance in the pretest compared to children with medium and high SES, while they were the ones who achieved greater improvements following the intervention [69]. The gamified CCT Match Quest and Recal All game applied in this population had a favorable effect on WM, attention, decision making, and motor control [85]. Some studies have shown that low-income children with low academic performance could benefit from specific training programs based on classical tasks [69].
Studies that evaluated the impact of EFs training on children's academic performance [82] found that directed EF training can have beneficial effects on low-performing children [69], with significant improvement in cognitive skills, such as non-verbal IQ, inhibition, reading [81, 90,91,92], and mathematical reasoning [70, 72, 73, 78, 79, 90, 91]. This finding is in line with previous studies showing that working memory capacity is closely related to mathematical thinking and, in particular, to speed in solving arithmetic problems [79]. Some RCTs with Cogmed and immediate transfer to WM showed distant transfer to performance in reading and mathematics [74, 92] and academic performance [70, 72]. However, some of these effects were sustained for more than one year [92], while others were not [74].
Regarding children with clinical conditions (see Fig. 6), an RCT with Cogmed in pediatric cancer survivors showed improvements in their WM with close transfer in other verbal and spatial WM measures, which was maintained for six months. The cognitive processes of children with this condition tend to worsen, so this CCT is postulated as an intervention that slows down the deterioration and stimulates their cognitive development [93]. Researchers have concluded that TM computerized cognitive training is feasible, acceptable, effective, and is associated with neuroplasticity among survivors of childhood cancer, showing adherence to training and satisfaction in participants [94]; they suggest future studies should evaluate brain changes identified in neuroimaging as indicative of training-related neuroplasticity [95].
In children with pediatric multiple sclerosis, a non-commercial CCT based on attention training improved concentration, attention, processing speed, TM, and cognitive flexibility, with distant transfer to executive functioning, updating, and planning strategies visuospatial memory [96]. In children with post-traumatic stress disorder, the non-commercial reading span program decreased the recurrence of symptoms and the performance of interference control [97]. In children with trichotillomania, a CCT based on the classic Go/No go task proved to be a potentially helpful intervention to improve inhibitory control [98]. Cogmed revealed effects on neuronal measures and cognitive performance of WM in children with neurofibromatosis [99] and hypoplastic left heart syndrome [100]. For malaria survivors, Captain's Log improved attention and memory outcomes [84].
Concerning children with neurodevelopmental disorders (Fig. 5), for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities, the TALI attention training program validated distant transfer to mathematics and arithmetic, however, not to reading, executive functions, and emotional control [101]. In children with specific learning difficulties, the analysis of event-related potentials showed that the amplitudes N160 (visual recognition) and P300 (update, working memory) were markedly lower in the control groups than in those who participated in a refresher training, with a transfer effect to mathematical performance [73]. In children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), the Progressive Cognitive Attention Training, based on a continuous performance task, described improvements in academic performance but did not reduce autistic symptomatology [102]. An RCT with Cogmed RM, although it did not evaluate its effect, found it feasible and beneficial to implement it in the home with an autistic population [103]; as long as families are trained in the use of behavior management techniques, it can facilitate adherence to training. In children with language disorders, the CCT Magic Memory based on classical tasks improved WM, attention, and processing speed without transfer to language skills [89].
The most studied clinical condition in the reviewed papers was ADHD. Non-commercial video game-based programs showed positive effects in different cognitive domains in this population: BrainGame Brian was shown to improve WM and IQ; although improvements in untrained EFs and behavior were nonspecific [104], one RCT found that improvement in WM, this program decreased the symptoms of hyperactivity [105], while another RCT found small effect sizes that lost significance when correcting them [29]. The CCT Stop & Think produced immediate transfer effects in IQ and far in performance in mathematics and science [82]. Neuroracer demonstrated improvements in attentional functioning and spatial working memory for the moderate ADHD group and a high severity subgroup, but not for the non-ADHD group [106]. The AKL-T01 program significantly improved attention performance [107].
The commercial gamified ThinkRx CCT was useful in cognitive remediation programs for children and adolescents with attention problems, with cognitive and behavioral benefits [108]. ThinkRx also allowed to identify significant improvements in associative memory, long-term memory, WM, visual and auditory processing, and processing speed in children with ADHD, and the researchers proposed the design of activities that involve multiple cognitive abilities. [109, 110]. Two RCTs evaluated the CCT of serious games with Plan-It Commander. The first described that girls, in general, and boys with less hyperactivity, had higher achievements in planning and organization [111]. The second showed improvements in time management, social skills, and WM. Serious games showed the potential to improve performance in daily life skills in children with ADHD [112].
A multimodal CCT with Cogniplus and Neurofeedback training showed favorable changes in ADHD symptoms and EF [38]. The progressive attention training program exhibited improvements in spatial-selective attention and executive attention, with gains maintained over time, and a modest transfer to sustained attention, although this did not imply improvement in ADHD symptoms [113].
An RCT that evaluated the use of CCT in conjunction with ADHD medication demonstrated significantly improved performance in attention, WM, cognitive control in both children with and without medication and better academic outcomes [86]. A functional magnetic resonance imaging study on the neural effects of a combined program with medication and the CCT ACTIVATE described improvements in WM, IQ, sustained attention, and changes in brain function related to performance on trained tasks [114].
Some CCTs did not demonstrate the expected effects. In the population of children born prematurely, WM training with Cogmed did not confer significant improvements in any EF [115]. BrainGame Brian was also ineffective in improving attention and academic performance in this population [116]. ACTIVATE in children with ADHD also found no significant effects on attention, inhibition, flexibility, or cognitive control [117]. Some CCTs based on basic tasks oriented to attention and inhibitory control in children with obesity did not demonstrate significant effects on these cognitive domains in any way that would impact the maintenance of weight loss [118]. A non-commercial visual attention program in children with autism did not show transference beyond the trained task [119].
3.2 Adolescents
Cogmed was the most studied program in adolescents: in an RCT, in some investigations, it was demonstrated to improve WM and generate transfer in different cognitive domains in young people with pediatric bipolar disorder and ADHD, bipolar youth improved basic attention and verbal working memory, inhibition and the regulation of behavior; young people with ADHD improved visuospatial WM and verbal attention, but showed transfer to behavioral regulation (93). In youth with Fragile X syndrome, Cogmed improved attention, working memory, and executive functioning [120]. In adolescents with ADHD, Cogmed demonstrated specific WM gains without transfer to sustained attention, response inhibition, or processing speed. However, MRI in these youths showed greater activation in WM-linked frontoparietal brain regions [121].
The video games Alien Game [122] and All you can ET [123] improved the change of tasks in healthy adolescents. Lumosity improved visual-spatial WM in adolescents with congenital or acquired brain damage [124, 125]. The Tree of intelligences videogame improved attention, time management, planning, and organization in adolescents with ADHD and a reduction in symptoms of hyperactivity [126]. A non-commercial CCT, based on brain plasticity theory, improves different components of working memory in adolescents with ADHD. They managed to obtain a level of performance similar to that of adolescents in typical development [127]. An RCT performed with Brain HQ described significant gains in processing speed, visual attention, visual cognitive control, and global cognition, and moderate gains in WM, cognitive flexibility, problem solving, and inhibition [128] (Fig. 6).
3.3 Young Adult
Most of the investigations on young adults were carried out in healthy people (Fig. 7). Training in the classic N-back task, used to train WM, was one of the most frequent approaches in this population. In some studies, it generated improvements in WM updating, limited to very similar tasks to those trained [129], while in others, when implemented with strategy training, it showed transfer to other domains [130]. Another study with n-back demonstrated transfer to the ability to inhibit irrelevant information [131]. In another work, the n-back task showed a modest effect in double task distant transfer [132]. The n-back task with Brain Twister2 generated more complex training demands, which became a more significant transfer in a structurally different WM task, with distant transfer to attentional control [133]. The use of n-back in conjunction with neurofeedback training showed improvements in executive function after a relatively short training period [134].
The CCT Mind Frontiers showed immediate transfer of n-back to other WM tasks and far transfer in lower-level skills such as perception speed and reaction times, which improved the processing of more complex tasks [135]. An RCT compared Mind Frontiers' unimodal treatment with a multimodal treatment that included meditation and high-intensity cardio-resistance training, both programs generated significant improvements in decision making, with better effects on EF with the multimodal program [136].
Some studies did not show the expected effects or limited distant transfer. A CCT based on the Stroop task showed improvement in WM without a reliable transfer effect on conflict resolution [137]. While the Stroop task for Inhibitory Control training was not transferred to an untrained inhibition task, neither did it transfer to WM, flexibility, or planning [138]. Lumosity achieved improvements in measures of flexibility, attention, and reaction times, but these changes were not reflected in the evoked potentials since the P3 component, related to attention, did not show the expected differences after training [139]. Other studies did not show the expected effects; in one RCT, Cogmed only improved specific WM tasks, making the degree of generalizability very limited [83].
Other CCT demonstrated improvements in WM in healthy adults, end effects distant transfer to visual attention [140] or other cognitive domains [141]. The Gwakkamol gamified CCT, designed to train Inhibition, did not identify any significant effect caused by the lack of a challenge at the level required by the participants [142], nor did MultiTask have a significant effect on WM, switching, or Inhibition, although for the participants it might because the measures used were not representative [143]. A non-commercial attentional control CCT improved selective attention, WM, and decision making [144]. In this vein, some researchers in their clinical trials conclude that the effect of distant transfer after EF training is far from clear [145].In young adults with schizophrenia, training with Brain HQ affected processing speed, WM, and attention [146], with more significant changes and better effects in patients with low or impaired initial performance, than in patients with high performance [147]. In patients with mood disorders, the intervention with Cogtrain improved executive functioning and processing speed, with a decrease in cognitive depressive symptoms, but without improvements in the mood [148]. In contrast, WM training with Cogmed improved attention, self-regulation, and stress dysregulation symptoms [149].
3.4 Average Adult
91.5% of the studies carried out on an average adult were in the clinical population (Fig. 8). A study in young adults, based on the Flanker task, showed on MRI that the amygdala-IFG connectivity was significantly increased after executive control training. These findings are the first to show that non-emotional training can alter amygdala-prefrontal connectivity, as well as improvements in attention, emotional control, and inhibitory control when performed with a constant frequency [150].
Five RCTs have been identified in adults with multiple sclerosis. One of these compared Captain's log Mindpower builder with manual and combined training, each program showing effects on WM, executive functioning, and processing speed [151]. Cogni-Track improved WM in this population; the researchers pointed out that its adaptive workload was a crucial characteristic of intervention effectiveness since it allowed for adaptation to the participant's particular needs [152]. N-back training showed favorable effects on this population's verbal memory, working memory, processing speed, and phonetic fluency [153]. Rehacom showed significant improvements in verbal and visuospatial episodic memory, processing speed, attention, and executive functioning, which was maintained for six months [154]; in an MRI study, this same program showed significant alterations in the brain during the task n-back, although this was not maintained after the end of the treatment [155]. Other studies with gamified CCT showed notable improvements in processing speed in adults with multiple sclerosis [156].
Some RCTs with Brain HQ showed remarkable effects in adults with schizophrenia. One of these found improvements in TM [157], while another showed the viability of Brain HQ in combination with pharmacological treatment [158]; some showed viability and adherence to remote administration of the intervention, with improvements in global cognition, verbal memory, problem solving [159], as well as attention, processing speed, working memory, and problem solving. However, another RCT showed that, despite adherence, they found no significant effects on executive functioning, WM, attention, or problem solving with Brain HQ in adults with schizophrenia [160].
Neuronpersonaltrainer, a CCT designed specifically for patients with schizophrenia, was shown to favor visual attention, logical memory, and emotional processing in patients in the early stages of schizophrenia without transfer to the functioning of daily life and social cognition [161, 162]. Another program designed for this population was CIRCuiTS, which demonstrated that it could protect against cognitive impairment [163] and promote improvements in processing speed, WM, and visual and verbal learning, although it did not affect vigilance reasoning and attention, and problem solving [164]. The intervention with the Cognitive Remediation Rehabilitation Software Jcores in schizophrenic patients showed microstructural changes in the posterior lobe of the left cerebellum associated with changes in verbal fluency [165]. However, some RCTs with Brain HQ [166] and Cogpack [153] found no significant effects on the interventions in this population.
In people with anxiety disorder, adaptive n-back training led to improvements in WM, with transfer to a reduction of self-reported worry and anxiety symptoms [167]. In depressed patients with cognitive deficits, Cogniplus led to a significant improvement in attention performance, with transfer to daily living skills and psychosocial functioning [168]. While the CCT PEAK, although it showed gains in executive functioning and processing speed in patients with depression, it did not improve mood or daily functioning [169]. In post-traumatic stress, cognitive-affective training with a gamified CCT did not show generalized benefit on EFs or symptoms [170]. In patients with obsessive–compulsive disorder, cognitive control training with Cogtrain was shown to strengthen the ability to defocus irrelevant information (including obsessions), with improvements in focus on the task and daily functioning [148].
In adults with acquired brain damage, an RCT compared a pencil and paper intervention with the CCT Rehacom, finding superiority in the latter's effects, which was shown to improve memory and sustained attention, and demonstrated superiority with the program [171]. However, with the same population, the CCT Cognifit did not show the effects of training in any cognitive process [172]. In adults with cognitive impairment, HappyneuronPro generated improvements in executive functioning and increased the power of the frontal theta frequency, reducing the power of the posterior alpha frequency in the EEG after two weeks of training [173]. In patients with stroke, CCT like BrainGymmer, showed effects on cognitive flexibility [174] and the Erica cognitive remediation platform, on attention and memory capacity, with benefits on mood [175]. Although BrainGymmer demonstrated improvements in some EFs, these occurred in both the intervention group and the control groups, suggesting that the improvement was due to the nonspecific effects of training [176].
Cogmed was shown to improve WM verbal function in drug abuse-related disorders, but did not show transfer effects or reduce drug abuse symptoms [177, 178]. Although CCT Curb your addiction only evaluated its effects with self-reported measures, it showed that WM training, in addition to traditional treatment, can reduce the clinical symptoms of impulsivity and improve self-regulation in methamphetamine users [179], as well as a CCT of goal management together with pharmacological treatment, showed a significant effect on inhibitory control and the general execution scheme that allows to achieve the objectives, with transfer to working memory and impulsivity and planning [180], training with Lumosity improved performance in an inhibition task and quality of life in this population [181]. A non-commercial CCT did not significantly affect EF in adult smokers [182].
In women with breast cancer, HappyneuronPro improved memory and concentration, verbal learning, and WM, which were maintained after five months [183]. This same program in patients with Huntington's disease neither effect nor adherence to it [184]. In HIV patients, CCT Lumosity [185] and PSSCogRehab [186] successfully reduced WM deficits.
3.5 Older Adults
In healthy older adults, the studies explored various EF training programs based on digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems (Fig. 9). The gamified Brain Age program affected interference control and mathematical reasoning [187], while the Star Wars Battlefront video game improved visual attention, task switching, and WM domains, which were not sustained after one month [188]. Training with lumosity improved visuospatial WM, episodic memory, and short-term memory in this population [189], and BrainGymmer produced improvements in cognitive flexibility, with near and far transfer to other domains [190]. The HappyneuronPro neurorehabilitation platform effectively strengthened visuospatial skills and some EFs such as visual processing speed, divided attention, and selective attention [191].
The n-back training showed improvements in WM in general [192, 193] and visuospatial and verbal WM in particular [26]. Other classical task-based programs showed effects on task change but with very limited close transfer [194]. Some free access CCT, such as Fresh minder, Mental-akiv, and Mentaga, improved WM [195]. Rehacom's WOME module significantly improved WM with stable effects and relevant impact on daily life [196]. Itrain, a training in simultaneous management of verbal operations, improved EF with close transfer to untrained verbal WM tasks and far transfer to language fluency, sentence memory, and resolution of syntactic ambiguity, implying that training WM can be a critical resource in language performance in older adulthood [197]. Verbal fluency in patients with dementia showed improvements in a non-commercial CCT, with benefits in psychological well-being [198]. A multicomponent cognitive control training showed benefits in this cognitive domain, with transfer to recognition memory and general cognitive functioning; magnetic resonance imaging also showed that the frontoparietal cognitive control network seemed to expand after training [199].
Some CCTs integrated the virtual reality paradigm in healthy older adults, such as the VR-CS program, which showed favorable effects on general cognition and executive functions, particularly attention [200]. These programs were also shown to be promising in patients with mild cognitive impairment, such as Job Stimulator combined with a physical activity program, which showed significant improvements in executive function, single-task, and dual-motor gait performance [201]. NeuroDRIVE showed a generally positive effect on cognitive flexibility in patients with acquired brain damage [202]. In patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia, virtual reality-based training showed greater adherence and satisfaction than the pencil and paper versions [203].
In healthy older adults, multimodal programs combining CCT with physical exercise were also studied. Through electroencephalogram, effects of SMATH strategic memory advanced reasoning training and aerobic exercise, on neural activity related to processing speed in the prefrontal cortex, while aerobic exercise alone did not show benefits of neuronal activity [204]. On the other hand, the SDAEWMT method, a dual-task training performed simultaneously that includes aerobic exercise training and WM training with Brain Age video game, demonstrated an effect on executive function without broader transfer effects [205]. A non-commercial CCT combined with aerobic exercise in sequential or simultaneous formats showed significant gains in executive function and WM with close transfer to similar activities [206]. EXCOG was another program that linked aerobic and cognitive challenges; it showed better results than the other treatments alone [207]. In patients with heart failure, a combined program of aerobic exercise and cognitive training with Brain HQ generated a significant improvement in verbal memory that was sustained at 3 and 6 months compared to exercise alone [208]. In older adults with hearing loss, a CCT combined with aerobic exercise found gains in auditory TM, more noticeable in sequential training than simultaneous training [209].
Some CCTs were shown to improve performance in domains associated with the trained tasks, without showing significant near or far transfer [194, 210,211,212], nor did they lead to structural brain changes evidenced by magnetic resonance imaging [213,214,215]. Results suggest that not all training procedures produce benefits in terms of generalization. Here there is evidence of a lack of transfer to daily life.
Concerning older adults with clinical conditions (Fig. 10), patients with neurological surgery had improvements in attention and WM after training with Cogmed, with transfer to processing speed, verbal learning and memory, improvements in quality of life, and symptoms of depression and anxiety [216]. In patients with stroke, the Rehabilitation Gaming System (RGS), reduces the deterioration in selective attention and working memory and a positive change in the mental well-being of the patients [217]. In older adults with depression, a processing speed training game showed improvement in this cognitive domain, with transfer to inhibition performance and mood [218].
In patients with ischemic cerebrovascular accident, PSSCogRehab, a CCT with a virtual environment, significantly improved spatial perception, memory, concentration, and problem solving [219]; in the same population, Lumosity was shown to improve goal achievement functional and the use of the internal strategy, increase yields in WM, although without significant transfer effects [220]. A combined program with Rehacom and acupuncture showed better effects on executive functions, attention, planning, short-term memory, and spatial and temporal orientation processes than with cognitive training alone [221, 222]. The computerized complex of neuropsychological correction KtasSmu showed that both the training group and the entertainment games group activated the patients' attention, accelerated their reaction time, improved their visuospatial orientation and their memory, which seems to show that any nonspecific cognitive stimulation is effective for cognitive correction in early recovery from a stroke [223].
In patients with mild cognitive impairment, non-commercial training based on video games has been shown to delay the decrease in WM, with transfer effect to other untrained executive functions and the vital capacity of life [224]. In this population, comparative studies have shown that Bettercog may be a better therapeutic tool than Comcog [225]. In Alzheimer's patients, a non-commercial neuroplasticity-based program showed constant improvements in processing speed [226], while Brainer1 was shown to support improvement in memory, attention, executive function, and language skills, which was sustained by six months. However, it suggests tasks with greater ecological validity [227]. In this population, the CCT CORE achieved improvements in task planning, interference inhibition, and divided attention, which, although it showed transfer to other memory functions, this benefit did not seem to be sustained over time. Therefore, the authors conclude that the improvement in memory does not reflect a specific improvement in this domain but rather a more efficient and strategic use of memory skills that have been learned during training [228]. In conjunction with active transcranial direct current stimulation, Brain HQ proved to be a helpful approach to managing cognitive dysfunctions of attentional and executive functions and mood in older adults with Parkinson's [40].
4 Discussion
The systematic review shows a snapshot of the potential use of digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems in rehabilitation and cognitive stimulation programs in different population groups. Table 7 presents a synthesis of characteristics of the interventions according to age groups. It can be observed that regardless of the subject's age, the programs with game-based and classic tasks-based activities continue to have great acceptance. In contrast, programs based on virtual reality and those that prioritize the ecological validity of their activities were studied mainly in older adults. The incursion of neurofeedback training has begun to gain notoriety in recent years among school age to older adulthood subjects, while other initiatives such as robotics are very briefly represented among the reviewed studies.
The executive function varied according to the population group, closely related to the characteristics of the population, since at school age, the most studied clinical condition was ADHD and ASD, and the executive functions to intervene were those related to those disorders, such as working memory, attention, and inhibitory control. At the same time, in older adults, the interventions were directed to both neurocognitive disorders such as Alzheimer's or to prevent cognitive decline in a healthy population, in that sense, the interventions were also interested in other attentional processes, processing speed, and verbal fluency.
Among the recognized advantages of this new cognitive training paradigm, there is the assurance of a more systematic, adaptive intervention scheme with permanent feedback, more superb usability, and better accessibility, as well as its applicability to the training of a vast repertoire of cognitive domains, ranging from improving motor function, basic cognitive processes such as perception, sensory discrimination and reaction times, to more complex processes such as language, IQ and executive functions. Interest in this software paradigm is on the rise, driving the emergence of commercial platforms, software and applications, and non-commercial initiatives worldwide. This impulse has been joined by clinical institutions, university research centers, and private organizations. Although the most significant interest has been its application in clinical settings, important initiatives can also be recognized for their approach in educational settings, especially in developing children. However, this remains an area that requires further exploration and rigorous studies to support the efficacy and effect of these interventions (Fig. 10).
The studies reviewed throughout highlight the benefits of cognitive training programs based on artificial cognitive systems. The possibility of remote access, offered by digital technologies, allows for the decentralization of the intervention and takes it from the laboratory or clinical institutions to the home, school, and workplace. Moreover, the multiplatform and multidevice nature (computers, tablets, and smartphones) of some ACS increases usability and restricts logistics, infrastructure, or equipment limitations. This dynamic enables the subject to interact with greater autonomy [68], so that direct and constant feedback is provided by an ACS agent. This in turn gives the health and education professionals greater flexibility to attend various subjects over time [129], without neglecting companionship, instructional support and follow-up of the intervention process. The possibility of remote access positively affected retention rates, adherence to treatment, and even more notable cognitive and functional improvements than some laboratory treatments [159]. Another virtue of CCT is to allow for an experience of sensory integration so that several sensory modalities are involved in the development of activities, which has been shown to favor learning and neurological stimulation [70].
Some CTTs were hosted on online platforms, which provide the professional in charge of the intervention with a vast repository of activities, which translates into diversification of tasks and the possibility of managing the sessions of the programs; on the other hand, it allows content managers to update and create new exercises constantly. These platforms also allow for the constant recording of the performance and evolution of the subject, evaluation, monitoring, providing real-time feedback to participants and professionals, and the generation of reports and statistics. Some of these platforms also have digitized neuropsychological tests and automatic scales calculation.
Regardless of the design and type of activities in CCTs, 43% emphasized the advantages of activities with adaptive complexity, that is, the complexity level of exercises advances progressively according to improvements of the subject and adjusts their level of difficulty to suit the baseline skills of the participant [222]. The researchers found that an adaptive workload that adapts to the subject's needs, is crucial to the effectiveness of an intervention. Moreover, it enables transfer to untrained cognitive domains with a positive long-term effect [152]. This adaptability responds to the execution of computer logarithms that act automatically from the received information, in this case, the participant's performance, which is possible thanks to the machine learning capabilities of the agent of the implemented artificial cognitive system. Therefore, this adaptive nature was seen by researchers as a key contribution of cognitive training based on artificial cognitive systems.
56.2% of the analyzed programs were composed of activities based on games, even commercial video games, but implemented for cognitive training, like serious health games, intentionally designed to train some cognitive domain or activities adapted to game modes, like traditional pencil and paper activities or classic gamified tasks. The researchers found that a serious game scheme fosters an intrinsically motivating environment [68, 170], this being a determining factor for the success of the intervention. Motivation, adherence, and cognitive improvement with gamified programs were observed in different population groups, finding that even at advanced ages, a certain degree of plasticity is preserved, and training with video games could be an effective intervention tool [189]. Additionally, it was found that this type of program could be easily incorporated into real-life school environments, with positive consequences for academic success, not only for children with typical development but also for children with special educational needs [90]. Video games and serious games require the subject to generate strategies of variable complexity and emotional regulatory challenges, with benefits in executive functioning, especially when they offer a challenging environment with increasing complexity.
Another trend that has gained interest in the academic community is the incorporation of virtual reality mechanisms, and they have been predominantly studied in the elderly population. They showed greater adherence and satisfaction than the pencil and paper versions of the activities [203]. The virtual reality programs had the purpose of allowing for a more immersive, complete experience, simulating everyday life environments, which at the same time provides alternatives to guarantee the ecological validity of the programs [33, 34].
Studies found that cognitive training programs based on digital technologies and artificial cognitive systems allow to overcome some of the limitations of traditional pencil and paper interventions, provide the opportunity to reach more people, and diversify their use and intervention objectives, demonstrating superiority in several aspects [162, 200]. However, they emphasize the need to consider differences in age, educational level, level of cognitive functioning, and participants' familiarity with ACS [200]. For this reason, to guarantee efficacy, adherence, and permanence in treatment, the researchers suggest encouraging the use of the computer or mobile devices and facilitating the use of the technologies to be implemented [229].
Based on all the emerging findings of this systematic review, a model has been formulated that integrates the elements involved in an intervention program based on artificial cognitive systems or digital technology. As shown in Fig. 10, at the center of any intervention program of this nature, there is the triple relationship that interweaves between the subject receiving the intervention, the subject in charge of the intervention, and the artificial cognitive system with which both they will interact. This relationship is bidirectional, generates constant and dynamic feedback between these three central axes, and is influenced by the context of the application of the intervention program.
The type of intervention, the device to be used, and its properties (such as providing constant feedback to the participant, recording and storing their progress, issuing reports, and providing inputs for the evaluation) should be established depending on the selected ACS. The person in charge of the intervention, for their part, is in charge of managing the program, defining the frequency, structure, and duration of the sessions, evaluating the impact of these, and providing advice and constant support to the subject of the intervention, the family and the other people involved, such as caregivers, assistants, teachers, and other professionals. As was already mentioned, it is crucial to promote an induction and familiarization scheme with the artificial cognitive system with which they will interact throughout the intervention. Said induction must respond to the person's needs, age, previous experience, level of training, and clinical condition.
Availability of data and materials
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, CRC, upon reasonable request at crobledoc@ut.edu.co. Also, the Abbreviated matrix characteristics of the studies reviewed are available within the article [and/or] its supplementary materials in the appendixes.
References
Bogdanova, Y.; Yee, M.K.; Ho, V.T.; Cicerone, K.D.: Computerized cognitive rehabilitation of attention and executive function in acquired brain injury: a systematic review. J. Head Trauma Rehabil. 31(6), 419–433 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000203
Harvey, P.D.; McGurk, S.R.; Mahncke, H.; Wykes, T.: Controversies in computerized cognitive training. Biol. Psychiatry. Cogn. Neurosci. Neuroimaging. 3(11), 907–915 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2018.06.008
Motter, J.N.; Pimontel, M.A.; Rindskopf, D.; Devanand, D.P.; Doraiswamy, P.M.; Sneed, J.R.: Computerized cognitive training and functional recovery in major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord. 189, 184–191 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.09.022
Niemeijer, M.; Sværke, K.W.; Christensen, H.K.: The effects of computer based cognitive rehabilitation in stroke patients with working memory impairment: a systematic review. J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. Off. J. Natl. Stroke Assoc. 29(12), 105265 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2020.105265
Pham, K.T.; Nabizadeh, A.; Selek, S.: Artificial intelligence and chatbots in psychiatry. Psychiatry Q. 93(1), 249–253 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-022-09973-8
Roth, C.B.; Papassotiropoulos, A.; Brühl, A.B.; Lang, U.E.; Huber, C.G.: Psychiatry in the digital age: A blessing or a curse? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18(16), 8302 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168302
Sonuga-Barke, E.; Brandeis, D.; Holtmann, M.; Cortese, S.: Computer-based cognitive training for ADHD: a review of current evidence. Child Adolesc. Psychiatr. Clin. N. Am. 23(4), 807–824 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2014.05.009
Vajawat, B.; Varshney, P.; Banerjee, D.: Digital gaming interventions in psychiatry: evidence, applications and challenges. Psychiatry Res. 295, 113585 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113585
Webb, S.L.; Loh, V.; Lampit, A.; Bateman, J.E.; Birney, D.P.: Meta-analysis of the effects of computerized cognitive training on executive functions: a cross-disciplinary taxonomy for classifying outcome cognitive factors. Neuropsychol. Rev. 28(2), 232–250 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-018-9374-8
Hramov, A.; Maksimenko, V.; Pisarchik, A.: Physical principles of brain-computer interfaces and their applications for rehabilitation, robotics and control of human brain states. Phys. Rep. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2021.03.002
Kletzel, S.L.; Sood, P.; Negm, A.; Heyn, P.C.; Krishnan, S.; Machtinger, J.; Hu, X.; Devos, H.: Effectiveness of brain gaming in older adults with cognitive impairments: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Am. Med. Direct. Assoc. 22(11), 2281–2288 (2021)
Goldstein, S.; Naglieri, J.A.; Princiotta, D.; Otero, T.M.: Introduction: a history of executive functioning. In: Goldstein, S.; Naglieri, J.A. (Eds.) Handbook of Executive Functioning. Springer (2013)
Blair, C.; Ursache, A.: A bidirectional model of executive functions and self-regulation. In: Vohs, K.D.; Baumeister, R.F. (Eds.) Handbook of Self-regulation: Research, Theory, and Applications, pp. 300–320. Guilford Press (2011)
Miller, E.; Cohen, J.: An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 167–202 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
Baddeley, A.D.: Working memory. Curr. Biol. 20(4), 136–140 (2010)
Petersen, S.E.; Posner, M.I.: The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 35, 73–89 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-062111-150525
Miyake, A.; Friedman, N.P.; Emerson, M.J.; Witzki, A.H.; Howerter, A.Y.; Wager, T.D.: The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ‘“frontal lobe”’ tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 41, 49–100 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
Barkley, R.: ExecutiveFunctions: What they Are, How they Work, and Why they Evolved. The Guilford Press (2012)
Zelazo, P.D.; Qu, L.; Muller, U.: Hot and cool aspects of executive function: relations in early development. In: Schneider, W.; Schumann, R.; Sodian, B. (Eds.) Young Children’s Cognitive Development: Interrelationships Among Executive Junctioning, Working Memory, Verbal Ability, and Theory of Mind, pp. 71–93. Lawrence Eribaum Associates Publishers (2004)
Portellano, J.A.: Intervención neuropsicológica de las funciones ejecutivas. Neuroeducación y funciones ejecutivas, Editorial CEPE (2018)
Trapaga-Ortega, C.M.: Introducción a la estimulación y rehabilitación de las funciones cognitivas. De la psicología cognitiva a la neuropsicología, Manual modern (2018)
Guerrero, G.; García, A.: Plataformas de rehabilitación neuropsicológica: estado actual y líneas de trabajo. Neurologia (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrl.2013.06.015
Lubrini, G; Periañez, J.A., Ríos-Lago, M.: Introducción a la estimulación cognitiva y la rehabilitación neuropsicológica. In: Muñoz, E. (Coord) Estimulación cognitiva y rehabilitación neuropsicológica, Editorial UOC (2009)
Liu, Q.; Zhu, X.; Ziegler, A.; Shi, J.: The effects of inhibitory control training for preschoolers on reasoning ability and neural activity. Scientifics. 5, 1–10 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep14200
Schubert, T.; Strobach, T.; Karbach, J.: New directions in cognitive training: on methods, transfer, and application. Psychol. Res. 78(6), 749–755 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0619-8
Ghavidel, F.; Fadardi, J.S.; Gatto, N.M.: Feasibility of using a computer-assisted working memory training program for healthy older women. Cogn. Process. 21, 383–390 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-020-00975-7
Peng, J.; Mo, L.; Huang, P.; Zhou, Y.: The effects of working memory training on improving fluid intelligence of children during early childhood. Cogn. Dev. 43, 224–234 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2017.05.006
van Houdt, C.A.; van Wassenaer-Leemhuis, A.G.; Oosterlaan, J.; Königs, M.; Koopman-Esseboom, C.; Laarman, A.; van Kaam, A.H.; Aarnoudse-Moens, C.: Executive function training in very preterm children: a randomized controlled trial. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry. 30(5), 785–797 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-020-01561-0
Dovis, S.; Maric, M.; Prins, P.J., et al.: Does executive function capacity moderate the outcome of executive function training in children with ADHD? ADHD Atten. Def. Hyp. Disord. 11, 445–460 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12402-019-00308-5
Papanastasiou, G.; Drigas, A.; Skianis, C.; Lytras, M.D.: Brain computer interface based applications for training and rehabilitation of students with neurodevelopmental disorders. A literature review. Heliyon. 6, e04250 (2020)
Hudak, E.M.; Edwards, J.D.; Andel, R.: The comparative effects of two cognitive interventions among older adults residing in retirement communities. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 3, 349–358 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-019-00125-8
Parre, M.D.; Sujatha, B.: Novel human-centered robotics: towards an automated process for neurorehabilitation. Neurol. Res. Int. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6690715
Gamito, P.; Oliveira, J.; Alves, C.; Santos, N.; Coelho, C.; Brito, R.: Virtual reality-based cognitive stimulation to improve cognitive functioning in community elderly: a controlled study. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 23(3), 150–156 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0271
Buccellato, K.H.; Nordstrom, M.; Murphy, J.M.; Burdea, G.C.; Polistico, K.; House, G.; Kim, N.; Grampurohit, N.; Sorensen, J.; Isaacson, B.M.; Pasquina, P.F.: A randomized feasibility trial of a novel, integrative, and intensive virtual rehabilitation program for service members post-acquired brain injury. Mil. Med. 185(1–2), e203–e211 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usz150
Coyle, H.; Traynor, V.; Solowij, N.: Computerized and virtual reality cognitive training for individuals at high risk of cognitive decline: systematic review of the literature. Am. J. Geriatric Psychiatry Off. J. Am. Assoc. Geriatric Psychiatry. 23(4), 335–359 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2014.04.009
Chen, X.; Liu, F.; Lin, S.; Yu, L.; Lin, R.: Effects of virtual reality rehabilitation training on cognitive function and activities of daily living of patients with post-stroke cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehab. S0003-9993(22), 00337–9 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2022.03.012
Stroppa, F.; Sarac, M.; Marcheschi, S.; Loconsole, C.; Sotgiu, E.; Solazzi, M.; Buongiorno, D.; Frisoli, A.: Real-time 3D tracker in robot-based neurorehabilitation. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recogn. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813445-0.00003-4
Minder, F.; Zuberer, A.; Brandeis, D.; Drechsler, R.: Informant-related effects of neurofeedback and cognitive training in children with ADHD including a waiting control phase: a randomized-controlled trial. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 27, 1055–1066 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-018-1116-1
Saleem, G.T.; Crasta, J.E.; Slomine, B.S.; Cantarero, G.L.; Suskauer, S.J.: Transcranial direct current stimulation in pediatric motor disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 100(4), 724–738 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.10.011
Manenti, R.; Cotelli, M.S.; Cobelli, C.; Gobbi, E.; Brambilla, M.; Rusich, D.; Alberici, A.; Padovani, A.; Borroni, B.; Cotelli, M.: Transcranial direct current stimulation combined with cognitive training for the treatment of Parkinson Disease: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Brain Stimul. 11(6), 1251–1262 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2018.07.046
Homer, B; Ober, T. M. Flynn, R.: Children and adolescents' development of executive functions in digital contexts. Proceedings of the Technology, Mind, and Society Conference, TechMindSociety. Association for Computing Machinery. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3183654.3183696
Pasqualotto, A.; Mazzoni, N.; Bentenuto, A.; Mulè, A.; Benso, F.; Venuti, P.: Effects of cognitive training programs on executive function in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review. Brain Sci. 11(10), 1280 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11101280
van de Ven, R.M.; Murre, J.M.; Veltman, D.J.; Schmand, B.A.: Computer-based cognitive training for executive functions after stroke: a systematic review. Front. Hum. Neurosci. (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00150
Ge, S.; Zhu, Z.; Wu, B., et al.: Technology-based cognitive training and rehabilitation interventions for individuals with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 18, 213 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0893-1
Owen, A.M.; Hampshire, A.; Grahn, J.A.: Putting brain training to the test. Nature 465, 775–778 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09042
Lakes, K.D.; Cibrian, F.L.; Schuck, S.E.B.; Nelson, M.; Hayes, G.R.: Digital health interventions for youth with ADHD: a mapping review. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100174
Cibrian, F.L.; Lakes, K.D.; Schuck, S.E.B.; Hayes, G.R.: The potential for emerging technologies to support self-regulation in children with ADHD: a literature review. Int. J. Child-Comput. Interact. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100421
Kirk, H.E.; Gray, K.; Riby, D.M.; Cornish, K.M.: Cognitive training as a resolution for early executive function difficulties in children with intellectual disabilities. Res. Dev. Disabil. 38, 145–160 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.026
Luis-Ruiz, S.; Caldú, X.; Sánchez-Castañeda, C.; Pueyo, R.; Garolera, M.; Jurado, M.Á.: Is cognitive training an effective tool for improving cognitive function and real-life behaviour in healthy children and adolescents? A systematic review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 116, 268–282 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.06.019
Slattery, E.J.; O’Callaghan, E.; Ryan, P.; Fortune, D.G.; McAvinue, L.P.: Popular interventions to enhance sustained attention in children and adolescents: a critical systematic review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 137, 104633 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104633
Jahn, F.S.; Skovbye, M.; Obenhausen, K.; Jespersen, A.E.; Miskowiak, K.W.: Cognitive training with fully immersive virtual reality in patients with neurological and psychiatric disorders: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Psychiatry Res. 300, 113928 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.113928
Bell, I.; Pot-Kolder, R.; Wood, S.J.; Nelson, B.; Acevedo, N.; Stainton, A.; Nicol, K.; Kean, J.; Bryce, S.; Bartholomeusz, C.F.; Watson, A.; Schwartz, O.; Daglas-Georgiou, R.; Walton, C.C.; Martin, D.; Simmons, M.; Zbukvic, I.; Thompson, A.; Nicholas, J.; Alvarez-Jimenez, M.; Allott, K.: Digital technology for addressing cognitive impairment in recent-onset psychosis: a perspective. Schizophrenia Res. Cogn. 28, 100247 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scog.2022.100247
Žepič, M.Z.: Improvement of cognitive abilities of older employees with computerized cognitive training (CCT). IFAC-PapersOnLine. 54(13), 651–656 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2021.10.525
Nguyen, L.; Murphy, K.; Andrews, G.: Cognitive and neural plasticity in old age: A systematic review of evidence from executive functions cognitive training. Ageing Res. Rev. 53, 100912 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2019.100912
Yen, H.Y.; Chiu, H.L.: Virtual reality exergames for improving older adults’ cognition and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 22(5), 995–1002 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2021.03.009
Moreno, B.; Muñoz, M.; Cuellar, J.; Domancic, S.; Villanueva, J.: Revisiones Sistemáticas: definición y nociones básicas. Revista clínica de periodoncia, implantología y rehabilitación oral. 11(3), 184–186 (2018)
Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S.: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, The Cochrane Collaboration (2011).
Brereton, P.; Kitchenham, B.A.; Budgen, D.; Turner, M.; Khalil, M.: Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. J. Syst. Softw. 80(4), 571–583 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009
Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.: The PRISMA group: preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 6(6), e1000097 (2009)
Uman, L.S.: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J. Can. Acad. Child Adolescent Psychiatry. Journal de l’Académie canadienne de psychiatrie de l’enfant et de l’adolescent 20(1), 57–59 (2011)
O'Connor, D.; Green, S., Higgins, F.J.: Defining the Review Question and Developing Criteria for Including Studies. In: Higgins, J.P., Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470712184.ch5
Anderson, P.: Assessment and development of executive function during childhood. Child Neuropsychol. 8(2), 71–82 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1076/chin.8.2.71.8724
Brown, T.E.: Attention Deficit Disorder: The Unfocused Mind in Children and Adults. Yale University Press (2005)
Di Lieto, M.C.; Pecini, C.; Castro, E.; Inguaggiato, E.; Cecchi, F.; Paolo, D.; Cioni, G.; Sgandurra, G.: Empowering executive functions in 5- and 6-year-old typically developing children through educational robotics: an RCT study. Front. Psychol. 10, 3084 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03084
Abt, C.: Serious Game. University Press of América (1987)
Gade, M.; Zoelch, C.; Seitz-Stein, K.: Training of visual-spatial working memory in preschool children. Adv. Cogn. Psychol. 13(2), 177–187 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5709/acp-0217-7
Liu, Q.; Zhu, X.; Ziegler, A., et al.: The effects of inhibitory control training for preschoolers on reasoning ability and neural activity. Sci. Rep. 5, 14200 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep14200
Gray, S.I.; Robertson, J.; Manches, A.; Rajendran, G.: BrainQuest: the use of motivational design theories to create a cognitive training game supporting hot executive function. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 127, 124–149 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.08.004
Wang, C.; Jaeggi, S.; Yang, L.; Zhang, T.; He, X.; Buschkuehl, M.; Zhang, Q.: Narrowing the achievement gap in low-achieving children by targeted executive function training. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 63, 87–95 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2019.06.002
Kavanaugh, B.C.; Tuncer, O.; Wexler, B.: Measuring and improving executive functioning in the classroom. J. Cogn. Enhancement. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-018-0095-y
Fernández-Molina, M.; Trella, M.; Barros, B.: Experiences with tasks supported by a cognitive e-learning system in preschool: modelling and training on working memory and attentional control. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 75, 35–51 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.11.001
Jones, J.S.; Milton, F.; Mostazir, M.; Adlam, A.R.: The academic outcomes of working memory and metacognitive strategy training in children: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Dev. Sci. 23(4), e12870 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12870
Zhang, H.; Chang, L.; Chen, X.; Ma, L.; Zhou, R.: Working memory updating training improves mathematics performance in middle school students with learning difficulties. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 12, 154 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00154
Roberts, G.; Quach, J.; Spencer-Smith, M.; Anderson, P.J.; Gathercole, S.; Gold, L.; Sia, K.L.; Mensah, F.; Rickards, F.; Ainley, J.; Wake, M.: Academic outcomes 2 years after working memory training for children with low working memory: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr. 170(5), e154568 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.4568
Studer-Luethi, B.; Bauer, C.; Perrig, W.J.: Working memory training in children: effectiveness depends on temperament. Mem. Cogn. 44, 171–186 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-015-0548-9
Bamidis, P.D.; Fissler, P.; Papageorgiou, S.G.; Zilidou, V.; Konstantinidis, E.I.; Billis, A.S.; Romanopoulou, E.; Karagianni, M.; Beratis, I.; Tsapanou, A.; Tsilikopoulou, G.; Grigoriadou, E.; Ladas, A.; Kyrillidou, A.; Tsolaki, A.; Frantzidis, C.; Sidiropoulos, E.; Siountas, A.; Matsi, S.; Papatriantafyllou, J.; Kolassa, I.T.: Gains in cognition through combined cognitive and physical training: the role of training dosage and severity of neurocognitive disorder. Front. Aging Neurosci. 7, 152 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2015.00152
Żelechowska, D.; Sarzyńska, J.; Nęcka, E.: Working memory training for schoolchildren improves working memory, with no transfer effects on intelligence. J. Intell. 5(4), 36 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5040036
Nelwan, M.; Vissers, C.; Kroesbergen, E.H.: Coaching positively influences the effects of working memory training on visual working memory as well as mathematical ability. Neuropsychologia 113, 140–149 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.04.002
Castellar, E.; All, A.; Marez, L.; Looy, J.: Cognitive abilities, digital games and arithmetic performance enhancement: a study comparing the effects of a math game and paper exercises. Comput. Educ. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.021
Rossignoli, T.; Quiros, M.; Perez, E.; González-Marqués, J.: Schoolchildren’s compensatory strategies and skills in relation to attention and executive function app training. Front. Psychol. 10, 2332 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02332
Sánchez, N.; Castillo, A.; López, J.A.; Pina, V.; Puga, J.L.; Campoy, G.; González-Salinas, C.; Fuentes, L.J.: Computer-based training in math and working memory improves cognitive skills and academic achievement in primary school children: behavioral results. Front. Psychol. 8, 2327 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02327
Wilkinson, H.R.; Smid, C.; Morris, S., et al.: Domain-specific inhibitory control training to improve children’s learning of counterintuitive concepts in mathematics and science. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 4, 296–314 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-019-00161-4
Etherton, J.L.; Oberle, C.D.; Rhoton, J., et al.: Effects of Cogmed working memory training on cognitive performance. Psychol. Res. 83, 1506–1518 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1012-9
Boivin, M.J.; Nakasujja, N.; Sikorskii, A.; Ruiseñor-Escudero, H.; Familiar-Lopez, I.; Walhof, K.; van der Lugt, E.M.; Opoka, R.O.; Giordani, B.: Neuropsychological benefits of computerized cognitive rehabilitation training in Ugandan children surviving severe malaria: a randomized controlled trial. Brain Res. Bull. 145, 117–128 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2018.03.002
Weissheimer, J.; Fujii, R.C.; Souza, J.G.: The effects of cognitive training on executive functions and reading in typically-developing children with varied socioeconomic status in Brazil. Ilha do Desterro: A J. Engl. Lang. Lit. Engl. Cult. Stud. 72(3), 85–100 (2019). https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8026.2019v72n3p85
Farias, A.C.; Cordeiro, M.L.; Felden, E.P.; Bara, T.S.; Benko, C.R.; Coutinho, D.; Martins, L.F.; Ferreira, R.T.; McCracken, J.T.: Attention-memory training yields behavioral and academic improvements in children diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder comorbid with a learning disorder. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 13, 1761–1769 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S136663
Zhao, X.; Jia, L.: Training and transfer effects of interference control training in children and young adults. Psychol. Res. 83(7), 1519–1530 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1007-6
Caviola, S.; Gerotto, G.; Mammarella, I.C.: Computer-based training for improving mental calculation in third- and fifth-graders. Acta Psychol. 171, 118–127 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.10.005
Stanford, E.; Durrleman, S.; Delage, H.: The effect of working memory training on a clinical marker of french-speaking children with developmental language disorder. Am. J. Speech Lang. Pathol. 28(4), 1388–1410 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_AJSLP-18-0238
Sánchez-Pérez, N.; Inuggi, A.; Castillo, A.; Campoy, G.; García-Santos, J.M.; González-Salinas, C.; Fuentes, L.J.: Computer-based cognitive training improves brain functional connectivity in the attentional networks: a study with primary school-aged children. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 13, 247 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00247
Wexler, B.; Iseli, M.; Leon, S., et al.: Cognitive priming and cognitive training: immediate and far transfer to academic skills in children. Sci. Rep. 6, 32859 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep32859
Söderqvist, S.; Bergman Nutley, S.: Working memory training is associated with long term attainments in math and reading. Front. Psychol. 6, 1711 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01711
Carlson-Green, B.; Puig, J.; Bendel, A.: Feasibility and efficacy of an extended trial of home-based working memory training for pediatric brain tumor survivors: a pilot study. Neuro-oncol. Pract. 42, 111–120 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/NOP/NPW015
Conklin, H.M.; Ashford, J.M.; Clark, K.N.; Martin-Elbahesh, K.; Hardy, K.K.; Merchant, T.E.; Ogg, R.J.; Jeha, S.; Huang, L.; Zhang, H.: Long-Term efficacy of computerized cognitive training among survivors of childhood cancer: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. J. Pediatr. Psychol. 42(2), 220–231 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsw057
Cox, L.E.; Ashford, J.M.; Clark, K.N.; Martin-Elbahesh, K.; Hardy, K.K.; Merchant, T.E.; Ogg, R.J.; Jeha, S.; Willard, V.W.; Huang, L.; Zhang, H.; Conklin, H.M.: Feasibility and acceptability of a remotely administered computerized intervention to address cognitive late effects among childhood cancer survivors. Neuro-oncol. Pract. 2(2), 78–87 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/nop/npu036
Simone, M.; Viterbo, R.G.; Margari, L.; Iaffaldano, P.: Computer-assisted rehabilitation of attention in pediatric multiple sclerosis and ADHD patients: a pilot trial. BMC Neurol. 18(1), 82 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-018-1087-3
Bomyea, J.; Stein, M.B.; Lang, A.J.: Interference control training for PTSD: a randomized controlled trial of a novel computer-based intervention. J. Anxiety Disord. 34, 33–42 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2015.05.010
Lee, H.J.; Espil, F.M.; Bauer, C.C.; Siwiec, S.G.; Woods, D.W.: Computerized response inhibition training for children with trichotillomania. Psychiatry Res. 262, 20–27 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.12.070
Yoncheva, Y.N.; Hardy, K.K.; Lurie, D.J.; Somandepalli, K.; Yang, L.; Vezina, G.; Kadom, N.; Packer, R.J.; Milham, M.P.; Castellanos, F.X.; Acosta, M.T.: Computerized cognitive training for children with neurofibromatosis type 1: a pilot resting-state fMRI study. Psychiatry Res. Neuroimaging. 266, 53–58 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2017.06.003
Jordan, L.; Siciliano, R.; Cole, D.; Lee, C.; Patel, N.; Murphy, L.; Markham, L.; Prussien, K.; Gindville, M.; Compas, B.: Cognitive training in children with hypoplastic left heart syndrome: a pilot randomized trial. Prog. Pediatr. Cardiol. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppedcard.2019.101185
Kirk, H.; Gray, K.; Ellis, K.; Taffe, J.; Cornish, K.: Impact of attention training on academic achievement, executive functioning, and behavior: a randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 122(2), 97–117 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-122.2.97
Spaniol, M.M.; Shalev, L.; Kossyvaki, L.; Mevorach, C.: Attention training in autism as a potential approach to improving academic performance: a school-based pilot study. J. Autism. Dev. Disord. 48(2), 592–610 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3371-2
Benyakorn, S.; Calub, C.A.; Riley, S.J.; Schneider, A.; Iosif, A.M.; Solomon, M.; Hessl, D.; Schweitzer, J.B.: Computerized cognitive training in children with autism and intellectual disabilities: feasibility and satisfaction study. JMIR Mental Health. 5(2), e40 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.9564
Dovis, S.; Van der Oord, S.; Wiers, R.W.; Prins, P.J.: Improving executive functioning in children with ADHD: training multiple executive functions within the context of a computer game: a randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial. PLoS ONE 10(4), e0121651 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121651
Kofler, M.J.; Sarver, D.E.; Austin, K.E.; Schaefer, H.S.; Holland, E.; Aduen, P.A.; Wells, E.L.; Soto, E.F.; Irwin, L.N.; Schatschneider, C.; Lonigan, C.J.: Can working memory training work for ADHD? Development of central executive training and comparison with behavioral parent training. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 86(12), 964–979 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000308
Davis, N.O.; Bower, J.; Kollins, S.H.: Proof-of-concept study of an at-home, engaging, digital intervention for pediatric ADHD. PLoS ONE 13(1), e0189749 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189749
Kollins, S.; DeLoss, D.; Canadas, E.; Lutz, J.; Findling, R.; Keefe, R.; Epstein, J.; Cutler, A.; Faraone, S.: A novel digital intervention for actively reducing severity of paediatric ADHD (STARS-ADHD): a randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Digital Health. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30017-0
Moore, A.L.; Carpenter, D.M., 2nd.; Miller, T.M.; Ledbetter, C.: Clinician-delivered cognitive training for children with attention problems: effects on cognition and behavior from the ThinkRx randomized controlled trial. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 14, 1671–1683 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S165418
Jedlicka, E.J.: LearningRx cognitive training for children and adolescents ages 5–18: effects on academic skills, behavior, and cognition. Front. Educ. (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2017.00062
Carpenter, D.M.; Ledbetter, C.; Moore, A.L.: LearningRx cognitive training effects in children ages 8–14: a randomized controlled trial. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 30(5), 815–826 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3257
Bul, K.; Doove, L.L.; Franken, I.; Oord, S.V.; Kato, P.M.; Maras, A.: A serious game for children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Who benefits the most? PLoS ONE 13(3), e0193681 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193681
Bul, K.C.; Kato, P.M.; Van der Oord, S.; Danckaerts, M.; Vreeke, L.J.; Willems, A.; van Oers, H.J.; Van Den Heuvel, R.; Birnie, D.; Van Amelsvoort, T.A.; Franken, I.H.; Maras, A.: Behavioral outcome effects of serious gaming as an adjunct to treatment for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a randomized controlled trial. J. Med. Internet Res. 18(2), e26 (2016). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5173
Kolodny, T.; Ashkenazi, Y.; Farhi, M., et al.: Computerized progressive attention training (CPAT) vs. active control in adults with ADHD. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 1, 526–538 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0056-x
de Oliviera Rosa, V.D.; Franco, A.R.; Júnior, G.A.; Moreira-Maia, C.R.; Wagner, F.; Simioni, A.; Bassotto, C.D.; Moritz, G.R.; Aguzzoli, C.S.; Buchweitz, A.; Schmitz, M.; Rubia, K.; Rohde, L.A.: Effects of computerized cognitive training as add-on treatment to stimulants in ADHD: a pilot fMRI study. Brain Imaging Behav. 14(5), 1933–1944 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-019-00137-0
Anderson, P.J.; Lee, K.J.; Roberts, G.; Spencer-Smith, M.M.; Thompson, D.K.; Seal, M.L.; Nosarti, C.; Grehan, A.; Josev, E.K.; Gathercole, S.; Doyle, L.W.; Pascoe, L.: Long-term academic functioning following cogmed working memory training for children born extremely preterm: a randomized controlled trial. J. Pediatr. 202, 92-97.e4 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.07.003
van Houdt, C.A.; van Wassenaer-Leemhuis, A.G.; Oosterlaan, J.; Königs, M.; Koopman-Esseboom, C.; Laarman, A.; van Kaam, A.H.; Aarnoudse-Moens, C.: Executive function training in very preterm children: a randomized controlled trial. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 30(5), 785–797 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-020-01561-0
Bikic, A.; Leckman, J.F.; Christensen, T.Ø.; Bilenberg, N.; Dalsgaard, S.: Attention and executive functions computer training for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): results from a randomized, controlled trial. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry. 27(12), 1563–1574 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-018-1151-y
Verbeken, S.; Braet, C.; Naets, T.; Houben, K.; Boendermake, W.; Zeepreventorium, V.Z.: Computer training of attention and inhibition for youngsters with obesity: a pilot study. Appetite 1(123), 439–447 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.029
Powell, G.; Wass, S.V.; Erichsen, J.T.; Leekam, S.R.: First evidence of the feasibility of gaze-contingent attention training for school children with autism. Aut. Int. J. Res. Pract. 20(8), 927–937 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315617880
Hessl, D.; Schweitzer, J.B.; Nguyen, D.V., et al.: Cognitive training for children and adolescents with fragile X syndrome: a randomized controlled trial of Cogmed. J. Neurodevelop. Disord. 11, 4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s11689-019-9264-2
Stevens, M.C.; Gaynor, A.; Bessette, K.L.; Pearlson, G.D.: A preliminary study of the effects of working memory training on brain function. Brain Imaging Behav. 10(2), 387–407 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11682-015-9416-2
Homer, B.D.; Plass, J.L.; Raffaele, C.; Ober, T.; Ali, A.: Improving high school students’ executive functions through digital game play. Comput. Educ. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.011
Homer, B.D.; Plass, J.L.; Rose, M.C.; MacNamara, A.P.; Pawar, S.; Ober, T.M.: Activating adolescents’ “hot” executive functions in a digital game to train cognitive skills: the effects of age and prior abilities. Cogn. Dev. 49, 20–32 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2018.11.005
Corti, C.; Poggi, G.; Romaniello, R.; Strazzer, S.; Urgesi, C.; Borgatti, R.; Bardoni, A.: Feasibility of a home-based computerized cognitive training for pediatric patients with congenital or acquired brain damage: an explorative study. PLoS ONE 13(6), e0199001 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199001
Corti, C.; Urgesi, C.; Poggi, G., et al.: Home-based cognitive training in pediatric patients with acquired brain injury: preliminary results on efficacy of a randomized clinical trial. Sci. Rep. 10, 1391 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57952-5
Papanastasiou, G.; Drigas, A.; Skianis, C.; Lytras, M.: Serious games in K-12 education: Benefits and impacts on students with attention, memory and developmental disabilities. Prog. Electron. Lib. Inf. Syst. 51(4), 424–440 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/PROG-02-2016-0020
Ackermann, S.; Halfon, O.; Fornari, E.; Urben, S.; Bader, M.: Cognitive Working Memory Training (CWMT) in adolescents suffering from Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a controlled trial taking into account concomitant medication effects. Psychiatry Res. 269, 79–85 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.07.036
Rowlands, A.; Fisher, M.; Mishra, J.; Nahum, M.; Brandrett, B.; Reinke, M.; Caldwell, M.; Kiehl, K.A.; Vinogradov, S.: Cognitive training for very high risk incarcerated adolescent males. Front. Psychiatry. (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00225
Moore, A.L.; Carpenter, D.M.; Miller, T.M., et al.: Comparing two methods of delivering thinkrx cognitive training to children ages 8–14: a randomized controlled trial of equivalency. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 3, 261–270 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-018-0094-z
Linares, R.; Borella, E.; Lechuga, M.T.; Carretti, B.; Pelegrina, S.: Nearest transfer effects of working memory training: a comparison of two programs focused on working memory updating. PLoS ONE 14(2), e0211321 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211321
Schwarb, H.; Nail, J.; Schumacher, E.H.: Working memory training improves visual short-term memory capacity. Psychol. Res. 80, 128–148 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0648-y
Waris, O.; Soveri, A.; Laine, M.: Transfer after working memory updating training. PLoS ONE 10(9), e0138734 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138734
Hogrefe, A.B.; Studer-Luethi, B.; Kodzhabashev, S., et al.: Mechanisms underlying n-back training: response consistency during training influences training outcome. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 1, 406–418 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0042-3
Hosseini, S.; Pritchard-Berman, M.; Sosa, N.; Ceja, A.; Kesler, S.R.: Task-based neurofeedback training: a novel approach toward training executive functions. Neuroimage 134, 153–159 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.03.035
Baniqued, P.L.; Allen, C.M.; Kranz, M.B.; Johnson, K.; Sipolins, A.; Dickens, C.; Ward, N.; Geyer, A.; Kramer, A.F.: Working memory, reasoning, and task switching training: Transfer effects, limitations, and great expectations? PLoS ONE 10(11), e0142169 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142169
Zwilling, C.E.; Daugherty, A.M.; Hillman, C.H., et al.: Enhanced decision-making through multimodal training. NPJ Sci. Learn. 4, 11 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-019-0049-x
Tusch, E.S.; Alperin, B.R.; Ryan, E.; Holcomb, P.J.; Mohammed, A.H.; Daffner, K.R.: Changes in neural activity underlying working memory after computerized cognitive training in older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 8, 255 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00255
Talanow, T.; Ettinger, U.: Effects of task repetition but no transfer of inhibitory control training in healthy adults. Acta Psychol. 187, 37–53 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.04.016
Olfers, K.; Band, G.: Game-based training of flexibility and attention improves task-switch performance: near and far transfer of cognitive training in an EEG study. Psychol. Res. 82(1), 186–202 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0933-z
Shahar, N.; Pereg, M.; Teodorescu, A.R.; Moran, R.; Meiran, N.: Formation of abstract task representations: exploring dosage and mechanisms of working memory training effects. Cognition 181, 151–159 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.007
Foster, J.L.; Harrison, T.L.; Hicks, K.L.; Draheim, C.; Redick, T.; Engle, R.: Do the effects of working memory training depend on baseline ability level? J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 43, 1677–1689 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000426
Wells, A.; Parong, J.; Mayer, R.E.: Limits on training inhibitory control with a focused video game. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 5, 83–98 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-020-00184-2
Martincevic, M.; Vranic, A.: Casual game or cognitive gain: multitask casual game as a training for young adults. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 4, 434–445 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-
Schmicker, M.; Müller, P.; Schwefel, M.; Müller, N.G.: Attentional filter training but not memory training improves decision-making. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11, 138 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00138
Wilkinson, A.; Yang, L.: Inhibition plasticity in older adults: practice and transfer effects using a multiple task approach. Neural Plast. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9696402
Piskulic, D.; Barbato, M.; Liu, L.; Addington, J.: Pilot study of cognitive remediation therapy on cognition in young people at clinical high risk of psychosis. Psychiatry 30(225), 93–98 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.10.021
Harvey, P.; Balzer, A.; Kotwicki, R.: Training engagement, baseline cognitive functioning, and cognitive gains with computerized cognitive training: a cross-diagnostic study. Schizophrenia Res. Cogn. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scog.2019.100150
Kashyap, H.; Reddy, P.; Mandadi, S.; Narayanaswamy, J.; Sudhir, P.; Reddy, Y.C.: Cognitive training for neurocognitive and functional impairments in obsessive compulsive disorder: a case report. J. Obsessive-Compul. Relat. Disord. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2019.100480
Liu, Z.X.; Glizer, D.; Tannock, R.; Woltering, S.: EEG alpha power during maintenance of information in working memory in adults with ADHD and its plasticity due to working memory training: a randomized controlled trial. Clin. Neurophysiol. 127(2), 1307–1320 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2015.10.032
Cohen, N.; Margulies, D.; Ashkenazi, S.; Schäfer, A.; Taubert, M.; Henik, A.; Villringer, A.; Okon-Singer, H.: Using executive control training to suppress amygdala reactivity to aversive information. Neuroimage 125, 1022–1031 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.069
Rahmani, M.; Rahimian Boogar, I.; Talepasand, S.; Nokani, M.: Comparing the effectiveness of computer-based, manual-based, and combined cognitive rehabilitation on cognitive functions in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Basic Clin. Neurosci. 11(1), 99–110 (2020). https://doi.org/10.32598/bcn.9.10.430
Pedullà, L.; Brichetto, G.; Tacchino, A.; Vassallo, C.; Zaratin, P.; Battaglia, M.A.; Bonzano, L.; Bove, M.: Adaptive vs. non-adaptive cognitive training by means of a personalized App: a randomized trial in people with multiple sclerosis. J. NeuroEngineering Rehabil. 13, 88 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0193-y
Pérez-Martín, M.Y.; González-Platas, M.; Eguía-Del Río, P.; Croissier-Elías, C.; Jiménez-Sosa, A.: Efficacy of a short cognitive training program in patients with multiple sclerosis. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 13, 245–252 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S124448
Messinis, L.; Nasios, G.; Kosmidis, M.H.; Zampakis, P.; Malefaki, S.; Ntoskou, K.; Nousia, A.; Bakirtzis, C.; Grigoriadis, N.; Gourzis, P.; Papathanasopoulos, P.: Efficacy of a computer-assisted cognitive rehabilitation intervention in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Behav. Neurol. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5919841
Campbell, J.; Langdon, D.; Cercignani, M.; Rashid, W.: A randomised controlled trial of efficacy of cognitive rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis: a cognitive, behavioural, and MRI study. Neural Plast. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4292585
Bove, R.M.; Rush, G.; Zhao, C.; Rowles, W.; Garcha, P.; Morrissey, J.; Schembri, A.; Alailima, T.; Langdon, D.; Possin, K.; Gazzaley, A.; Feinstein, A.; Anguera, J.: A videogame-based digital therapeutic to improve processing speed in people with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility study. Neurol. Ther. 8(1), 135–145 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-018-0121-0
Bell, M.D.; Laws, H.; Pittman, B., et al.: Comparison of focused cognitive training and portable “brain-games” on functional outcomes for vocational rehabilitation participants. Sci. Rep. 8, 1779 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20094-w
Michalopoulou, P.G.; Lewis, S.W.; Drake, R.J.; Reichenberg, A.; Emsley, R.; Kalpakidou, A.K.; Lees, J.; Bobin, T.; Gilleen, J.K.; Pandina, G.; Applegate, E.; Wykes, T.; Kapur, S.: Modafinil combined with cognitive training: pharmacological augmentation of cognitive training in schizophrenia. Eur. Neuropsychopharmacol. J. Eur. College Neuropsychopharmacol. 25(8), 1178–1189 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2015.03.009
Biagianti, B.; Fisher, M.; Howard, L.; Rowlands, A.; Vinogradov, S.; Woolley, J.: Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of remotely delivering cognitive training to people with schizophrenia using tablets. Schizophrenia Res. Cogn. 10, 7–14 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scog.2017.07.003
Jahshan, C.; Vinogradov, S.; Wynn, J.K.; Hellemann, G.; Green, M.F.: A randomized controlled trial comparing a “bottom-up” and “top-down” approach to cognitive training in schizophrenia. J. Psychiatr Res. 109, 118–125 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2018.11.027
Fernandez-Gonzalo, S.; Turon, M.; Jodar, M.; Pousa, E.; Hernandez-Rambla, C.; García, R.; Palao, D.A.: A new computerized cognitive and social cognition training specifically designed for patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder in early stages of illness: a pilot study. Psychiatry Res. 228(3), 501–509 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.007
Fernandez-Gonzalo, S.; Turon, M.; Jodar, M.; Pousa, E.; Hernandez, C.; García, R.; Palao, D.: A new computerized cognitive and social cognition training specifically designed for patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder in early stages of illness: a pilot study. Psychiatry Res. 228(3), 501–509 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2015.06.007
Reeder, C.; Huddy, V.; Cella, M.; Taylor, R.; Greenwood, K.; Landau, S.; Wykes, T.: A new generation computerised metacognitive cognitive remediation programme for schizophrenia (CIRCuiTS): a randomised controlled trial. Psychol. Med. 47(15), 1–11 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291717001234
Palumbo, D.; Mucci, A.; Giordano, G.M.; Piegari, G.; Aiello, C.; Pietrafesa, D.; Annarumma, N.; Chieffi, M.; Cella, M.; Galderisi, S.: The efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of a remotely accessible use of CIRCuiTS, a computerized cognitive remediation therapy program for schizophrenia: a pilot study. Neuropsychiatr. Dis. Treat. 15, 3103–3113 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S221690
Matsuoka, K.; Morimoto, T.; Matsuda, Y.; Yasuno, F.; Taoka, T.; Miyasaka, T.; Yoshikawa, H.; Takahashi, M.; Kitamura, S.; Kichikawa, K.; Kishimoto, T.: Computer-assisted cognitive remediation therapy for patients with schizophrenia induces microstructural changes in cerebellar regions involved in cognitive functions. Psychiatry Res. Neuroimaging. 292, 41–46 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2019.09.001
Mahncke, H.W.; Kim, S.J.; Rose, A.; Stasio, C.; Buckley, P.; Caroff, S.; Duncan, E.; Yasmin, S.; Jarskog, L.F.; Lamberti, J.S.; Nuechterlein, K.; Strassnig, M.; Velligan, D.; Ventura, J.; Walker, T.; Stroup, T.S.; Keefe, R.S.E.: Evaluation of a plasticity-based cognitive training program in schizophrenia: results from the eCaesar trial. Schizophr. Res. 208, 182–189 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2019.03.006
Hotton, M.; Derakshan, N.; Fox, E.: A randomised controlled trial investigating the benefits of adaptive working memory training for working memory capacity and attentional control in high worriers. Behav. Res. Ther. 100, 67–77 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2017.10.011
Listunova, L.; Kienzle, J.; Bartolovic, M.; Jaehn, A.; Grützner, T.M.; Wolf, R.C.; Aschenbrenner, S.; Weisbrod, M.; Roesch-Ely, D.: Cognitive remediation therapy for partially remitted unipolar depression: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. J. Affect. Disord. 276, 316–326 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.07.008
Motter, J.N.; Grinberg, A.; Lieberman, D.H.; Iqnaibi, W.B.; Sneed, J.R.: Computerized cognitive training in young adults with depressive symptoms: effects on mood, cognition, and everyday functioning. J. Affect Disord. 15(245), 28–37 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.10.109
Fonzo, G.A.; Fine, N.B.; Wright, R.N.; Achituv, M.; Zaiko, Y.V.; Merin, O.; Shalev, A.Y.; Etkin, A.: Internet-delivered computerized cognitive & affective remediation training for the treatment of acute and chronic posttraumatic stress disorder: two randomized clinical trials. J. Psychiatr. Res. 115, 82–89 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.05.007
Fernandez, E.; Bergado Rosado, J.A.; Rodriguez Perez, D.; Salazar Santana, S.; Torres Aguilar, M.; Bringas, M.L.: Effectiveness of a computer-based training program of attention and memory in patients with acquired brain damage. Behav. Sci. 8(1), 4 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8010004
Välimäki, M.; Mishina, K.; Kaakinen, J.K.; Holm, S.K.; Vahlo, J.; Kirjonen, M.; Pekurinen, V.; Tenovuo, O.; Korkeila, J.; Hämäläinen, H.; Sarajuuri, J.; Rantanen, P.; Orenius, T.; Koponen, A.: Digital gaming for improving the functioning of people with traumatic brain injury: randomized clinical feasibility study. J. Med. Internet Res. 20(3), e77 (2018). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7618
Best, M.W.; Gale, D.; Tran, T.; Haque, M.K.; Bowie, C.R.: Brief executive function training for individuals with severe mental illness: effects on EEG synchronization and executive functioning. Schizophr. Res. 203, 32–40 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2017.08.052
van de Ven, R.M.; Schmand, B.; Groet, E.; Veltman, D.J.; Murre, J.M.: The effect of computer-based cognitive flexibility training on recovery of executive function after stroke: rationale, design and methods of the TAPASS study. BMC Neurol. 15, 144 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-015-0397-y
De Luca, R.; Leonardi, S.; Spadaro, L.; Russo, M.; Aragona, B.; Torrisi, M.; Maggio, M.G.; Bramanti, A.; Naro, A.; De Cola, M.C.; Calabrò, R.S.: Improving cognitive function in patients with stroke: Can computerized training be the future? J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2017.11.008
van de Ven, R.M.; Murre, J.; Buitenweg, J.; Veltman, D.J.; Aaronson, J.A.; Nijboer, T.; Kruiper-Doesborgh, S.; van Bennekom, C.; Ridderinkhof, K.R.; Schmand, B.: The influence of computer-based cognitive flexibility training on subjective cognitive well-being after stroke: a multi-center randomized controlled trial. PLoS ONE 12(11), e0187582 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187582
Khemiri, L.; Brynte, C.; Stunkel, A.; Klingberg, T.; Jayaram-Lindström, N.: Working memory training in alcohol use disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 43(1), 135–146 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.13910
Rass, O.; Schacht, R.L.; Buckheit, K.; Johnson, M.W.; Strain, E.C.; Mintzer, M.Z.: A randomized controlled trial of the effects of working memory training in methadone maintenance patients. Drug Alcohol Depend. 156, 38–46 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.08.012
Brooks, S.J.; Wiemerslage, L.; Burch, K.; Maiorana, S.; Cocolas, E.; Schiöth, H.; Kamaloodien, K.; Stein, D.: The impact of cognitive training in substance use disorder: the effect of working memory training on impulse control in methamphetamine users. Psychopharmacology 234, 1911–1921 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-017-4597-6
Valls-Serrano, C.; Caracuel, A.; Verdejo-Garcia, A.: Goal Management Training and Mindfulness Meditation improve executive functions and transfer to ecological tasks of daily life in polysubstance users enrolled in therapeutic community treatment. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1(165), 9–14 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.04.040
Marceau, E.M.; Berry, J.; Lunn, J.; Kelly, P.J.; Solowij, N.: Cognitive remediation improves executive functions, self-regulation and quality of life in residents of a substance use disorder therapeutic community. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1(178), 150–158 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.04.023
Loughead, J.; Falcone, M.; Wileyto, E.P.; Albelda, B.; Audrain-McGovern, J.; Cao, W.; Kurtz, M.M.; Gur, R.C.; Lerman, C.: Can brain games help smokers quit?: Results of a randomized clinical trial. Drug Alcohol Depend. 168, 112–118 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.08.621
Damholdt, M.F.; Mehlsen, M.; O’Toole, M.S.; Andreasen, R.K.; Pedersen, A.D.; Zachariae, R.: Web-based cognitive training for breast cancer survivors with cognitive complaints-a randomized controlled trial. Psychooncology 25(11), 1293–1300 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.4058
Yhnell, E.; Furby, H.; Lowe, R.S.; Brookes-Howell, L.C.; Drew, C.J.G.; Playle, R.; Watson, G.; Metzler-Baddeley, C.; Rosser, A.E.; Busse, M.E.: A randomised feasibility study of computerised cognitive training as a therapeutic intervention for people with Huntington’s disease (CogTrainHD). Pilot Feasibility Stud. 19(6), 88 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-020-00623-z
Towe, S.L.; Hartsock, J.T.; Xu, Y.; Meade, C.S.: Web-based cognitive training to improve working memory in persons with co-occurring HIV infection and cocaine use disorder: outcomes from a randomized controlled trial. AIDS Behav. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-020-02993-0
Towe, S.L.; Patel, P.; Meade, C.S.: The acceptability and potential utility of cognitive training to improve working memory in persons living with HIV: a preliminary randomized trial. J. Assoc. Nurses AIDS Care: JANAC 28(4), 633–643 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jana.2017.03.007
Ballesteros, S.; Mayas, J.; Prieto, A.; Ruiz-Marquez, E.; Toril, P.; Reales, J.: Effects of video game training on measures of selective attention and working memory in older adults: results from a randomized controlled trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00354
Brooks, S.J.; Burch, K.H.; Maiorana, S.A.; Cocolas, E.; Schioth, H.B.; Nilsson, E.K.; Kamaloodien, K.; Stein, D.J.: Psychological intervention with working memory training increases basal ganglia volume: a VBM study of inpatient treatment for methamphetamine use. NeuroImage. Clin. 12, 478–491 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2016.08.019
Toril, P.; Reales, J.M.; Mayas, J.; Ballesteros, S.: Video game training enhances visuospatial working memory and episodic memory in older adults. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 10, 206 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00206
Buitenweg, J.; van de Ven, R.M.; Prinssen, S.; Murre, J.; Ridderinkhof, K.R.: Cognitive flexibility training: a large-scale multimodal adaptive active-control intervention study in healthy older adults. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 11, 529 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00529
Hay, M.; Adam, N.; Bocca, M., et al.: Effectiveness of two cognitive training programs on the performance of older drivers with a cognitive self-assessment bias. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 8, 20 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12544-016-0207-7
Matysiak, O.; Kroemeke, A.; Brzezicka, A.: Working memory capacity as a predictor of cognitive training efficacy in the elderly population. Front. Aging Neurosci. 11, 126 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00126
Hering, A.; Meuleman, B.; Bürki, C., et al.: Improving older adults’ working memory: the influence of age and crystallized intelligence on training outcomes. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 1, 358–373 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0041-4
Grönholm-Nyman, P.; Soveri, A.; Rinne, J.O.; Ek, E.; Nyholm, A.; Stigsdotter Neely, A.; Laine, M.: Limited effects of set shifting training in healthy older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 9, 69 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00069
Gajewski, P.; Falkenstein, M.: ERP and behavioral effects of physical and cognitive training on working memory in aging: a randomized controlled study. Neural Plast. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3454835
Weicker, J.; Hudl, N.; Frisch, S.; Lepsien, J.; Mueller, K.; Villringer, A.; Thöne-Otto, A.: WOME: theory-based working memory training: a placebo-controlled, double-blind evaluation in older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 10, 247 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2018.00247
Payne, B.R.; Stine-Morrow, E.: The effects of home-based cognitive training on verbal working memory and language comprehension in older adulthood. Front. Aging Neurosci. 9, 256 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00256
De Luca, R.; Bramanti, A.; De Cola, M.C.: Cognitive training for patients with dementia living in a sicilian nursing home: a novel web-based approach. Neurol. Sci. 37, 1685–1691 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-016-2659-x
Kim, H.; Chey, J.; Lee, S.: Effects of multicomponent training of cognitive control on cognitive function and brain activation in older adults. Neurosci. Res. 124, 8–15 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2017.05.004
Requena, C.; Rebok, G.W.: Evaluating successful aging in older people who participated in computerized or paper-and-pencil memory training: the memoria mejor program. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16(2), 191 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16020191
Liao, Y.Y.; Chen, I.H.; Lin, Y.J.; Chen, Y.; Hsu, W.C.: Effects of virtual reality-based physical and cognitive training on executive function and dual-task gait performance in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized control trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. 11, 162 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00162
Ettenhofer, M.L.; Guise, B.; Brandler, B.; Bittner, K.; Gimbel, S.I.; Cordero, E.; Schmitt, S.; Williams, K.; Cox, D.; Roy, M.J.; Chan, L.: Neurocognitive driving rehabilitation in virtual environments (NeuroDRIVE): a pilot clinical trial for chronic traumatic brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation 44(4), 531–544 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-192718
Manera, V.; Chapoulie, E.; Bourgeois, J.; Guerchouche, R.; David, R.; Ondrej, J.; Drettakis, G.; Robert, P.: A feasibility study with image-based rendered virtual reality in patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. PLoS ONE 11(3), e0151487 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151487
Motes, M.A.; Yezhuvath, U.S.; Aslan, S.; Spence, J.S.; Rypma, B.; Chapman, S.B.: Higher-order cognitive training effects on processing speed-related neural activity: a randomized trial. Neurobiol. Aging. 62, 72–81 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2017.10.003
Takeuchi, H.; Magistro, D.; Kotozaki, Y.; Motoki, K.; Nejad, K.; Nouchi, R.; Jeong, H.; Sato, C.; Sessa, S.; Nagatomi, R.; Zecca, M.; Takanishi, A.; Kawashima, R.: Effects of simultaneously performed dual-task training with aerobic exercise and working memory training on cognitive functions and neural systems in the elderly. Neural Plast. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3859824
Lai, L.; Bruce, H.; Bherer, L., et al.: Comparing the transfer effects of simultaneously and sequentially combined aerobic exercise and cognitive training in older adults. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 1, 478–490 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0052-1
Raichlen, D.A.; Bharadwaj, P.K.; Nguyen, L.A., et al.: Effects of simultaneous cognitive and aerobic exercise training on dual-task walking performance in healthy older adults: results from a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Geriatr. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-1484-5
Gary, R.A.; Paul, S.; Corwin, E.; Butts, B.; Miller, A.H.; Hepburn, K.; Williams, B.; Waldrop-Valverde, D.: Exercise and cognitive training as a strategy to improve neurocognitive outcomes in heart failure: a pilot study. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 27(8), 809–819 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2019.01.211
Bruce, H.; Lai, L.; Bherer, L.; Lussier, M.; St-Onge, N.; Li, K.Z.H.: The effect of simultaneously and sequentially delivered cognitive and aerobic training on mobility among older adults with hearing loss. Gait Posture. 67, 262–268 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.10.020
Strobach, T.; Huestegge, L.: Evaluating the effectiveness of commercial brain game training with working-memory tasks. J. Cogn. Enhanc. 1, 539–558 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0053-0
Hynes, S.M.: Internet, home-based cognitive and strategy training with older adults: a study to assess gains to daily life. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 28, 1003–1008 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-015-0496-z
Goghari, V.M.; Lawlor-Savage, L.: Comparison of cognitive change after working memory training and logic and planning training in healthy older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 9, 39 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2017.00039
Biel, D.; Steiger, T.K.; Volkmann, T.; Jochems, N.; Bunzeck, N.: The gains of a 4-week cognitive training are not modulated by novelty. Hum. Brain Map. 41, 2596–2610 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24965
Minear, M.; Brasher, F.; Guerrero, C.B., et al.: A simultaneous examination of two forms of working memory training: evidence for near transfer only. Mem. Cogn. 44, 1014–1037 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0616-9
Wayne, R.V.; Hamilton, C.; Jones Huyck, J.; Johnsrude, I.S.: Working memory training and speech in noise comprehension in older adults. Front. Aging Neurosci. 8, 49 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00049
Liberta, T.A.; Kagiwada, M.; Ho, K.; Spat-Lemus, J.; Voelbel, G.T.; Kohn, A.; Perrine, K.; Josephs, L.; McLean, E.; Sacks-Zimmerman, A.: An investigation of Cogmed working memory training for neurological surgery patients. Interdiscip. Neurosurg. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inat.2020.100786
Maier, M.; Ballester, B.R.; Leiva Bañuelos, N.; Duarte Oller, E.; Verschure, P.: Adaptive conjunctive cognitive training (ACCT) in virtual reality for chronic stroke patients: a randomized controlled pilot trial. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 17(1), 42 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-0652-3
Nouchi, R.; Saito, T.; Nouchi, H.; Kawashima, R.: Small acute benefits of 4 weeks processing speed training games on processing speed and inhibition performance and depressive mood in the healthy elderly people: evidence from a randomized control trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. 8, 302 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00302
Baltaduonienė, D.; Kubilius, R.; Berškienė, K.; Vitkus, L.; Petruseviciene, D.: Change of cognitive functions after stroke with rehabilitation systems. Transl. Neurosci. 10, 118–124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1515/tnsci-2019-0020
Withiel, T.D.; Wong, D.; Ponsford, J.L.; Cadilhac, D.A.; New, P.; Mihaljcic, T.; Stolwyk, R.J.: Comparing memory group training and computerized cognitive training for improving memory function following stroke: a phase II randomized controlled trial. J. Rehabil. 51(5), 343–351 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2540
Jiang, C.; Yang, S.; Tao, J.; Huang, J.; Li, Y.; Ye, H.; Chen, S.; Hong, W.; Chen, L.: Clinical efficacy of acupuncture treatment in combination with rehacom cognitive training for improving cognitive function in stroke: a 2 × 2 factorial design randomized controlled trial. J. Am. Med. Direct. Assoc. 17(12), 1114–1122 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2016.07.021
Dundon, N.M.; Dockree, S.P.; Buckley, V.; Merriman, N.; Carton, M.; Clarke, S.; Roche, R.A.; Lalor, E.C.; Robertso, I.H.; Dockree, P.M.: Impaired auditory selective attention ameliorated by cognitive training with graded exposure to noise in patients with traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychologia 75, 74–87 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.05.012
Prokopenko, S.; Bezdenezhnih, A.F.; Mozheyko, E.; Petrova, M.M.: A comparative clinical study of the effectiveness of computer cognitive training in patients with post-stroke cognitive impairments without dementia. Psychol. Russia: State of Art. 11, 55–67 (2018). https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2018.0205
Weng, W.; Liang, J.; Xue, J.; Zhu, T.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, J.; Chen, S.: The transfer effects of cognitive training on working memory among chinese older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial. Front. Aging Neurosci. (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00212
Lee, G.J.; Bang, H.J.; Lee, K.M.; Kong, H.H.; Seo, H.S.; Oh, M.; Bang, M.: A comparison of the effects between 2 computerized cognitive training programs, Bettercog and COMCOG, on elderly patients with MCI and mild dementia: a single-blind randomized controlled study. Medicine 97(45), e13007 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000013007
Rolandi, E.; Dodich, A.; Galluzzi, S., et al.: Randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of a multilevel non-pharmacologic intervention in older adults with subjective memory decline: design and baseline findings of the E.Mu.N.I. study. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 32, 817–826 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01403-3
Cavallo, M.; Hunter, E.M.; van der Hiele, K.; Angilletta, C.: Computerized structured cognitive training in patients affected by early-stage alzheimer’s disease is feasible and effective: a randomized controlled study. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 31(8), 868–876 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw072
Alloni, A.; Quaglini, S.; Panzarasa, S.; Sinforiani, E.; Bernini, S.: Evaluation of an ontology-based system for computerized cognitive rehabilitation. Int. J. Med. Inform. 115, 64–72 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.04.005
Clausen, A.N.; Thelen, J.; Francisco, A.J.; Bruce, J.; Martin, L.; McDowd, J.; Aupperle, R.L.: Computer-based executive function training for combat veterans with PTSD: a pilot clinical trial assessing feasibility and predictors of dropout. Front. Psychiatry. (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00062
Funding
The article shows a systematic review made between June 2020 and June 2021 as part of the doctoral work ascribed to the research line on Artificial Cognitive Systems of the Cognitive Sciences Doctorate Program at Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Robledo-Castro, C., Castillo-Ossa, L.F. & Corchado, J.M. Artificial Cognitive Systems Applied in Executive Function Stimulation and Rehabilitation Programs: A Systematic Review. Arab J Sci Eng 48, 2399–2427 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-07292-5
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-022-07292-5