• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience >Corrigendum: Brain training with non-action video games enhances aspects of cognition in older adults: a randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Corrigendum: Brain training with non-action video games enhances aspects of cognition in older adults: a randomized controlled trial

机译：勘误：使用非动作视频游戏进行大脑训练可增强老年人的认知能力：一项随机对照试验

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We would like to clarify that this article as well as the Mayas and colleagues article (Mayas et al., 2014 ) originated from the randomized controlled intervention study: clinical trial number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02007616 . The Mayas et al. ( 2014 ) article included the trial number at the end of the Abstract. At the top of this article it said CLINICAL TRIAL ARTICLE but the clinical trial number did not appear due to an involuntary omission, as the trial number was included in the four preliminary versions of the manuscript under revision. We explain that because we would not like to make the reader think that both articles corresponded to results from two different randomized controlled trials. In an intend to avoid misunderstandings, we referred twice in the present publication to the Mayas et al. ( 2014 ) paper, the first reference in the Method section and the second in the Discussion. In the Results section, we described briefly the cross-modal oddball attention task and said that, “Results from this task have been reported separately (Mayas et al., 2014 )”. Figure 3B corresponding to the results of the cross-modal oddball attention task is similar to Figure 2B of Mayas et al. ( 2014 ). In the Brain training article, we included a brief description of the oddball task, a summary of the results and Figure 3B to give the reader a whole picture of the outcomes of our intervention study (that included two speed of processing tasks, the executive control WCST, the cross-modal oddball attention task, several tasks to assess visuospatial working memory – Corsi Blocks, the Jigsaw-puzzle task, and the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test-, Immediate and Delayed Visual Episodic Memory Tests, and the Wellbeing SPF-IL scale) and referred the reader to Mayas et al. ( 2014 ) dedicated specifically to the oddball task for more details. We would like to explain the differences in the samples showed in the Consort diagrams of the two publications. The reason is that the Mayas et al diagram refers only to the cross-modal oddball task designed to assess alertness and distraction while the Frontier's Consort diagram refers to the whole intervention study with all the outcomes mentioned above. One of the participants of the control group was removed due to the large number of errors in the oddball task, but he was included in the other tasks of the study in which reached inclusion criteria. The same occurred in the trained group. The oddball data were analyzed separately by our coauthors and by the time we sent the results only 15 participants (out of 17) completed the post-evaluation (we could not contact a participant and the other was traveling that week). A few days later, these two participants completed the post-evaluation, but we decided not to include them in the Mayas paper. Conflict of interest statement The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
机译：我们想澄清一下，这篇文章以及Mayas及其同事的文章（Mayas等人，2014年）源自于随机对照干预研究：临床试验编号：ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02007616。玛雅人等。 （2014）文章的摘要末尾包含了试验编号。在本文的顶部，它表示“临床试验文章”，但由于非自愿遗漏而未出现临床试验编号，因为该试验编号已包含在正在修订的四个原始版本的手稿中。我们解释说，因为我们不想让读者认为这两篇文章都对应于两个不同的随机对照试验的结果。为了避免造成误解，我们在本出版物中两次提及Mayas等人。 （2014年）论文，“方法”部分中的第一个参考文献，以及“讨论”中的第二个参考文献。在“结果”部分中，我们简要描述了跨模式奇异球注意任务，并说：“此任务的结果已单独报告（Mayas等，2014）”。对应于交叉模式奇异球注意任务结果的图3B与Mayas等人的图2B相似。 （2014）。在“大脑训练”文章中，我们包括了对奇异球任务的简要说明，结果摘要以及图3B，以使读者对我们的干预研究的结果有一个完整的了解（包括处理任务的两种速度，执行控制WCST，交叉模式怪胎注意力任务，评估视觉空间工作记忆的多项任务-Corsi Blocks，拼图游戏任务和Rey-Osterrieth复杂体形测试，即时和延迟的视觉情景记忆测试以及Wellnessing SPF- IL等级），并将读者介绍给Mayas等。 （2014）专门研究奇数球任务，以了解更多详细信息。我们想解释一下这两个出版物的Consort图中显示的样本之间的差异。原因是Mayas等人的图仅指旨在评估机敏性和分散注意力的交叉模式奇异球任务，而Frontier's Consort图则指涉及上述所有结果的整个干预研究。由于奇数球任务中存在大量错误，对照组的一名参与者被撤职，但他被纳入研究的其他任务，达到了纳入标准。在受过训练的小组中也发生了同样的情况。我们的合著者分别分析了奇数球数据，当我们发送结果时，只有15位参与者（17位参与者）完成了评估后的信息（我们无法与一位参与者联系，而另一位参与者正在那周旅行）。几天后，这两名参与者完成了评估后，但我们决定不将其包括在Mayas论文中。利益冲突声明作者声明，这项研究是在没有任何商业或金融关系的情况下进行的，可以将其解释为潜在的利益冲突。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号