Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
188,932 studies31 sourcesUpdated 25 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYFrontiers in aging neuroscience

Cognitive transfer and durability of computerised cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

  1. 1Department of Physical Education, Chongqing Electric Power College , ,
  2. 2College of Education, Soonchunhyang University , ,
  3. 3School of Physical Education, China University of Mining and Technology , ,

Abstract

Background

Computerised cognitive training (CCT) may improve cognition in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but whether gains transfer beyond trained processes and persist after training cessation remains uncertain. We examined immediate and sustained cognitive near transfer, cognitive far transfer, and functional far transfer.Methods

Seven databases were searched from inception to 1 July 2026. Randomised controlled trials comparing CCT with eligible controls and reporting transfer outcomes were included. Outcomes within 4 weeks after training were classified as immediate and those at least 12 weeks after cessation as sustained. Multiple eligible outcomes from the same trial were aggregated to one trial-level estimate. Random-effects models used restricted maximum likelihood and modified Knapp-Hartung inference. RoB 2 and GRADE assessed risk of bias and certainty.Results

Eleven reports from eight independent trials (722 randomised participants) were included; no trial was at overall low risk of bias. Immediate cognitive near transfer was small and imprecise (6 trials, N = 376; Hedges g = 0.14, 95% CI - 0.23 to 0.50; very low certainty). Immediate cognitive far transfer was also uncertain (8 trials, N = 586; g = 0.23, 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.81; very low certainty) and strongly influenced by Wu et al.; excluding this trial yielded g = 0.00 (95% CI - 0.26 to 0.25). Sustained cognitive near transfer (4 trials, N = 287; g = -0.07, 95% CI - 0.31 to 0.18) and sustained cognitive far transfer (5 trials, N = 397; g = 0.02, 95% CI - 0.26 to 0.29) were close to the null but based on few trials. Functional far-transfer evidence was low-certainty and limited.Conclusion

The evidence base is small and methodologically limited, and transfer classification requires reviewer judgement. Current evidence does not establish convincing durable transfer effects beyond trained processes. Larger, rigorous trials with validated functional outcomes and longer follow-up are needed.Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420261463612.

Related

  1. Augmented reality-assisted Tai Chi for adults with diabetes-associated cognitive impairment: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
    Haoxuan Li, Xinming Xu, Zhouyu Guan +22
    BMJ OpenPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 4.0Full textPsychiatry & mental healthCrossref
  2. Remote multicomponent intervention for older adults with cognitive impairment in community settings: multisite randomised controlled trial
    Geon Young Jang, Sungyang Jo, Ji Yeon Baek +4
    Age and AgeingPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textPsychiatry & mental healthPMC
  3. Virtual Reality for Pain, Anxiety, and Patient Experience in Awake Urological Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials
    Alhassen Alseneid, Ali Alseneid, Shivam Bhindi +3
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  4. The Role of Intraoperative Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Angiography in Reducing Anastomotic Leak After Colorectal Resection: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials
    Layan Abu-Khalaf, Yahia Khalil, Raya Abu-Khalaf +2
    CureusPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textGeneral medicineEurope PMC
  5. Drug coated balloons versus drug eluting stents for de novo coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Natasha Corballis, Rajkumar Natarajan, Ioannis Merinopoulos +4
    eClinicalMedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-ND 4.0Surgery & anaesthesiaCrossref
BibTeX
@article{luo2026cognitive,
  title = {{Cognitive transfer and durability of computerised cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials}},
  author = {Hao Luo and Lin Deng and Lingyun Long and Wenjia Chen and Jiayi Yao and Yong Liu},
  journal = {Frontiers in aging neuroscience},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.3389/fnagi.2026.1952783},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13716727},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Cognitive transfer and durability of computerised cognitive training in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
AU  - Hao Luo
AU  - Lin Deng
AU  - Lingyun Long
AU  - Wenjia Chen
AU  - Jiayi Yao
AU  - Yong Liu
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/15
JO  - Frontiers in aging neuroscience
DO  - 10.3389/fnagi.2026.1952783
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13716727
AB  - Background  Computerised cognitive training (CCT) may improve cognition in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but whether gains transfer beyond trained processes and persist after training cessation remains uncertain. We examined immediate and sustained cognitive near transfer, cognitive far transfer, and functional far transfer.Methods  Seven databases were searched from inception to 1 July 2026. Randomised controlled trials comparing CCT with eligible controls and reporting transfer outcomes were included. Outcomes within 4 weeks after training were classified as immediate and those at least 12 weeks after cessation as sustained. Multiple eligible outcomes from the same trial were aggregated to one trial-level estimate. Random-effects models used restricted maximum likelihood and modified Knapp-Hartung inference. RoB 2 and GRADE assessed risk of bias and certainty.Results  Eleven reports from eight independent trials (722 randomised participants) were included; no trial was at overall low risk of bias. Immediate cognitive near transfer was small and imprecise (6 trials, N = 376; Hedges g = 0.14, 95% CI - 0.23 to 0.50; very low certainty). Immediate cognitive far transfer was also uncertain (8 trials, N = 586; g = 0.23, 95% CI - 0.35 to 0.81; very low certainty) and strongly influenced by Wu et al.; excluding this trial yielded g = 0.00 (95% CI - 0.26 to 0.25). Sustained cognitive near transfer (4 trials, N = 287; g = -0.07, 95% CI - 0.31 to 0.18) and sustained cognitive far transfer (5 trials, N = 397; g = 0.02, 95% CI - 0.26 to 0.29) were close to the null but based on few trials. Functional far-transfer evidence was low-certainty and limited.Conclusion  The evidence base is small and methodologically limited, and transfer classification requires reviewer judgement. Current evidence does not establish convincing durable transfer effects beyond trained processes. Larger, rigorous trials with validated functional outcomes and longer follow-up are needed.Systematic review registration  https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420261463612.
SN  - 1663-4365
ER  -