RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Computerized Cognitive Training in People with Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.03.23.21254003
DO 10.1101/2021.03.23.21254003
A1 Nathalie H. Launder
A1 Ruth Minkov
A1 Christopher G. Davey
A1 Carsten Finke
A1 Hanna Malmberg Gavelin
A1 Amit Lampit
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/26/2021.03.23.21254003.abstract
AB Importance Cognitive impairment is a common feature of both symptomatic and remitted states of depression that is associated with poorer psychosocial outcomes and treatment non-response. As such, finding treatments to maintain or enhance cognition in people with depression is imperative.Objective To investigate the efficacy of computerized cognitive training (CCT) on cognitive and functional outcomes in people with depression.Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were screened through the Ovid interface for eligible studies from inception to 29 June 2020, with no language or publication type restrictions.Study Selection Two independent reviewers conducted duplicate study screening and assessed against the following inclusion criteria: (1) adults with depression, (2) CCT with minimum three hours practice, (3) active or passive control group, (4) cognitive and/or functional outcomes measured at baseline and post-intervention, (5) randomized controlled trials. Of 3666 identified studies, 24 met selection criteria.Data Extraction and Synthesis The methods used followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB2) was conducted independently by two reviewers. Analysis of the pooled results was conducted using robust variance estimation (RVE) based on a correlational dependence model.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was change from baseline to post-intervention in overall cognition. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, psychiatric symptoms, psychosocial functioning, daily functioning, subjective cognition, global cognition and domain-specific cognitive function.Results Twenty-four studies encompassing 28 comparisons and 1,141 unique participants met inclusion criteria. The pooled effect size of CCT for overall cognition was small and significant (g=0.26; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.36; P<.001; τ2=0.057; I2=37%; prediction interval −0.25 to 0.76) and for depressive symptoms was small and significant (g=0.24; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.45; P=.02; τ2=0.075; I2=46%; prediction interval −0.37 to 0.86). Evidence of small-study effect was found for both overall cognition and depressive symptoms, with trim-and-fill analysis imputing two studies for each. Sensitivity analyses of overall cognition and depressive symptoms revealed the main analyses to be robust. Benefits of CCT were also found for psychosocial functioning and domain-specific cognitive function in abstract reasoning, learning/encoding efficiency, retrieval fluency, high working memory, low working memory, inhibition and processing speed. No significant effect was found for psychiatric symptoms, subjective cognition, global cognition or domain-specific cognitive function in short-term memory and shifting. No separate pooled analyses were conducted for daily functioning or verbal reasoning, updating and visual processing domains due to two or less studies reporting outcomes for each. A moderating effect of dose was found for overall cognition, with larger doses of CCT associated with greater effect size estimates.Conclusions and Relevance This systematic review and meta-analysis indicates that CCT is an efficacious intervention for overall cognition, depressive symptoms, psychosocial functioning and domain-specific cognitive function for people with depression.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-66217/v1 Funding StatementThis work has been supported by a CR Roper Fellowship from the University of Melbourne provided to AL.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesSupplementary tables and figures are available from the link below. https://melbourne.figshare.com/articles/online_resource/Supplementary_information_for_Launder_et_al/14245748