4.3 Article

Cogmed Working Memory Training for Youth with ADHD: A Closer Examination of Efficacy Utilizing Evidence-Based Criteria

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/15374416.2013.787622

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R34MH088845, R34 MH088845] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The current review applied the evidence-based treatment criteria espoused by the Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (Silverman & Hinshaw, 2008) to specifically evaluate the short-term and longer term efficacy of Cogmed Working Memory Training (CWMT) as a treatment for youth with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Utilizing a systematic literature search, 7 studies that employed the school-age version of CWMT were identified for this review. The data reviewed herein suggest mixed findings regarding the benefit of CWMT for youth with ADHD. Two randomized controlled studies have demonstrated that CWMT led to improvements in neuropsychological outcomes and parent-rated ADHD symptoms relative to wait-list control and placebo treatment conditions. Another study demonstrated effects of CWMT relative to a placebo condition on an analog observation of behavior during an academic task, although this study did not find an effect of CWMT on parent-rated ADHD. Finally, an additional study utilizing an active comparison control condition did not find incremental benefits of CWMT on parent- or teacher-rated ADHD. Critical issues in interpreting existing studies include lack of alignment between demonstrated outcomes and the hypothesized model of therapeutic benefit of CWMT, issues with equivalence of control conditions, and individual differences that may moderate treatment response. Collectively, the strengths and limitations of the studies reviewed suggest that CWMT is best defined as a Possibly Efficacious Treatment for youth with ADHD. We suggest future directions for research and conclude with clinical implications of our findings for the treatment of youth with ADHD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据