Yesterday, I read a Mind Hacks post by Tom Stafford on ‘Brain Training’ titled “A gold-standard study on brain training” (http://mindhacks.com/2015/11/05/a-gold-standard-study-on-brain-training/). My students sometimes ask about ‘brain training’, so I read the post and then ordered and downloaded the research article by Corbett, Owen, Hampshire, et al. (2015) it discussed.
The research question: can online cognitive training (CT) help to prevent dementia and maintain cognitive functioning in adults >50 years of age? The procedures used to answer this question are, as you might suspect, somewhat intricate. The protocol is online here: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/depts/wolfson/about/people/staff/Protocol1.aspx I’ll provide a highly abridged version of the methods and discussion because I want to focus on some troubling issues that the authors seemed to minimize in their Discussion section. (Stafford’s blog post also provides a brief summary and critique.) There were two treatment groups. Each received a different type of online cognitive training (CT): Reasoning CT: consisted of tasks such as “Select the ‘odd one out’ from 4 shapes that varied in terms of color, shape, and solidity” (p. 3). General CT: consisted of tasks involving memory, attention, math, etc. The “control group performed equivalent Internet-based tasks involving a game in which people were asked to put a series of statements in correct numerical order. Participants were invited to search the Internet to find the correct answers. Number of completed sessions per participant was recorded as an integrated feature in the online platform” (p. 991). They used a randomized, double-blind design and observed the participants for six months. At the beginning, there were 6742 participants: 3830 were 51-60 years and 2912 were >60 years The primary outcome measure was self-reported “instrumental activities of daily living” (IADL) in those ≥61 years (the IADL scale used is here: https://www.abramsoncenter.org/media/1197/instrumental-activities-of-daily-living.pdf). Other measures of cognitive functioning were used as secondary outcome measures in all participants. Their discussion of the results seemed to paint a glowing picture of the effectiveness of online CT: * “the data clearly demonstrate a significant benefit to activities of daily living in a group of adults older than 60 receiving both the online GCT and ReaCT interventions compared with control” (p. 994) * “These findings are novel and extremely valuable since it is known to be difficult to elicit change in IADLs, particularly in a cognitively healthy group. This impact on IADLs therefore indicates the potential for this approach as an effective public health intervention that could improve this key measure of independence and quality of life in older adults.” (p. 994) * “Analysis of other cognitive outcomes in adults older than 50 also shows a considerable generalizable impact on cognition, with substantial benefits to reasoning and [verbal learning]L in both active CT groups at 6 months, and more modest benefits in [spatial working memory]” (p. 994) Etc., etc. There are several troubling issues with this study. I’ll mention two: (1) They “recommended” that participants train “for 10 minutes daily, although flexibility was allowed” (p. 991). Given that there was no direct contact with participants, there was no way for them to carefully check on and effectively encourage compliance. (2) They started out with almost 7000 participants; but by the end of the study lost most of them: Reasoning CT START END LOST 51-60 2557 595 76.7% >60 1023 268 73.8% General CT 51-60 2432 428 82.4% >60 1096 243 78.8% Control 51-60 1753 176 90.0% >60 794 93 88.8% The largest percentage of drop-outs was in the control group. They noted under Figure 1 that “Reasons for withdrawal are not known due to the online format of intervention and study design.” (I have a copy of Figure 1 in my dropbox here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gab8ad496hu7uq8/LOSS%20OF%20SUBJECTS.jpg?dl=0 ) That’s all I have time for. But those of you who, like me, get student questions about brain training might want to take a closer look. Reference Corbett, A,, Owen, A., Hampshire, A., Grahn, J., Stenton, R., Dajani, S., et al. (2015). The effect of an online cognitive training package in healthy older adults: An online randomized controlled trial. Journal of Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine, 16(11), 990-997. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2015.06.014 -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeffry Ricker, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Social/Behavioral Sciences Scottsdale Community College 9000 E. Chaparral Road Scottsdale, AZ 85256-2626 Office: SB-123 Fax: (480) 423-6298 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrJeffryRicker/timeline/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jeffry-ricker/3b/511/438 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=47337 or send a blank email to leave-47337-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
