↓ Skip to main content

Influence of combined physical and cognitive training on cognition: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
3 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
Title
Influence of combined physical and cognitive training on cognition: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0315-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Lauenroth, Anestis E. Ioannidis, Birgit Teichmann

Abstract

Numerous daily activities require simultaneous application of motor and cognitive skills (dual-tasking). The execution of such tasks is especially difficult for the elderly and for people with (neuro-) degenerative disorders. Training of physical and cognitive abilities helps prevent or slow down the age-related decline of cognition. The aim of this review is to summarise and assess the role of combined physical-and-cognitive-training characteristics in improving cognitive performance and to propose an effective training scheme within the frame of a suitable experimental design. A systematic electronic literature search was conducted in selected databases. The following criteria were compulsory for inclusion in the study: 1. A (Randomized) Controlled Trial (RCT or CT) design; 2. Implementation of combined physical and cognitive training, either simultaneously (dual task) or subsequently - at least one hour per weekly over four weeks or more; 3. Cognitive outcomes as a study's endpoint. Twenty articles met the inclusion criteria. It appears that either simultaneous or subsequently combined physical and cognitive training is more successful compared to single physical or single cognitive exercise. Training characteristics like length, frequency, duration, intensity and level of task difficulty seem to determine cognitive performance. However, the articles show that cognitive improvement seems to remain somewhat confined to trained cognitive functions rather than generalising to other cognitive or daily-living skills. Due to methodological heterogeneity among studies, results need to be treated with caution. We critically discuss the role of training characteristics and propose a potentially effective training intervention within an appropriate experimental design.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 160 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 18%
Student > Bachelor 22 14%
Researcher 19 12%
Unspecified 19 12%
Other 44 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 20%
Unspecified 24 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 15%
Sports and Recreations 23 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 12%
Other 39 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2018.
All research outputs
#3,337,992
of 13,457,774 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#681
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,377
of 264,623 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,457,774 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,623 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them