Computerized cognitive training produces a small but statistically significant improvement in cognitive performance in healthy older adults¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q4·i1small
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q4 i1 Across 52 RCTs, CCT versus control yielded a small significant pooled effect (g = 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.29) after removal of one outlier. → Lampit A 2014
Evidence¶
Lampit A 2014¶
Lampit A, Hallock H, Valenzuela M (2014) Computerized Cognitive Training in Cognitively Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effect Modifiers. PLoS Med 11(11): e1001756. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001756
q4 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r3
Random-effects meta-analysis of 52 RCTs (4,885 participants) of at least 4 h of CCT in healthy older adults, after removing one implausible outlier. The pooled effect was "g = 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.29" with low heterogeneity (I2 = 29.92%) and no significant funnel-plot asymmetry.
"Following this, heterogeneity reduced to a low level, and the summary effect size was reduced (g = 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.29, p,0.001; I2 = 29.92%, 95% CI 0.63% to 50.57%; Figure 2)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- CCT yields small significant gains in nonverbal memory, working memory, and visuospatial skills, but only weak evidence for verbal memory — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Group-based CCT is effective while home-based CCT is not — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- CCT shows no significant effects on executive functions or attention in healthy older adults — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- CCT improves processing speed with a moderate effect, the largest domain effect, though with large heterogeneity — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Training more than three sessions per week neutralizes CCT efficacy, while one or 2–3 sessions per week are effective — related
- Working-memory-only training shows no positive evidence of efficacy in healthy older adults — related
- Brain games produce statistically significant cognitive performance gains in older adults, but gains are modest and do not detect improvements over control tasks or produce far transfer — related
- Speed-of-processing training based on UFOV tasks reduces minimum duration thresholds in older adults, with benefits persisting up to two years — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Training benefits did not extend to processing speed tasks, indicating specificity to cognitive control processes — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cct-small-significant-overall-effect-healthy-older-adults |
title |
Computerized cognitive training produces a small but statistically significant improvement in cognitive performance in healthy older adults |
description |
Computerized cognitive training produces a small but statistically significant improvement in cognitive performance in healthy older adults |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — lampit-a-2014 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.