1,026
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Reviews

The relative effectiveness of different combination modes for exercise and cognitive training on cognitive function in people with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s disease: a network meta-analysis

, , , &
Pages 2328-2338 | Received 03 Aug 2021, Accepted 01 Jan 2022, Published online: 17 Jan 2022
 

Abstract

Objectives

To compare and rank the relative effectiveness of different modes for exercise combined cognitive training (ECT) in people with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) or Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, SPORTDiscus, PsycInfo, and OpenGrey systematically from inception to May 2020. Studies were included that met the inclusion criteria: randomized controlled trials, involving people with MCI or dementia, performing ECT without other interventions, and assessing global cognitive function, memory function, and executive function. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed using a random effects model.

Results

We included 20 articles from 16 studies with 1180 participants. For global cognition, separate modality had the highest probability of being the optimal approach (the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value = 77.5%). For memory function, the interactive mode had the greatest probability of being the best choice (SUCRA = 84.7%). Concerning executive function, the dual-task modality and separate modality had similar SUCRA values. Subgroup analysis revealed no differences for the relative effectiveness of ECT among people with MCI or among all participants.

Conclusions

Separate and interactive combination modality had the highest probability of being the most effective mode for overall cognition and memory performance. However, the evidence is insufficient to reveal the best combination mode for executive function.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2022.2026879 .

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81871854).

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.