Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2011 Mar;17(2):256-66. doi: 10.1017/S1355617710001530. Epub 2010 Dec 21.

Predictors of neuropsychological improvement following cognitive rehabilitation in patients with gliomas.

Author information

  • 1CoRPS, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.

Erratum in

  • J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2011 Mar;17(2):384.


This study investigated the specific patient factors that predict responsiveness to a cognitive rehabilitation program. The program has previously been demonstrated to be successful at the group level in patients with gliomas, but it is unclear which patient characteristics optimized the effect of the intervention at the individual level. Four categories of possible predictors of improvement were selected for evaluation: sociodemographic and clinical variables, self-reported cognitive symptoms, and objective neuropsychological test performance. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were conducted, beginning with the most accessible (sociodemographic) variables and ending with the most difficult (baseline neuropsychological) to identify in clinical practice. Nearly 60% of the participants of the intervention were classified as reliably improved. Reliable improvement was predicted by age (p = .003) and education (p = .011). Additional results suggested that younger patients were more likely to benefit specifically from the cognitive rehabilitation program (p = .001), and that higher education was also associated with improvement in the control group (p = .024). The findings are discussed in light of brain reserve theory. A practical implication is that cognitive rehabilitation programs should take the patients' age into account and, if possible, adapt programs to increase the likelihood of improvement among older participants.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Cambridge University Press
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk