Several recent reviews have suggested that cognitive rehabilitation may hold promise in the treatment of memory deficits experienced by patients with mild cognitive impairment. In contrast to the previous reviews that mainly focused on outcome, the current review examines key methodological challenges that are critical for designing and interpreting research studies and translating results into clinical practice. Using methodological details from 36 studies, we first examine diagnostic variability and how the use of cutoffs may bias samples toward more severely impaired patients. Second, the strengths and limitations of several common rehabilitative techniques are discussed. Half of the reviewed studies used a multi-technique approach that precludes the causal attribution between any specific technique and subsequent improvement. Third, there is a clear need to examine the dose-response relationship since this information was strikingly absent from most studies. Fourth, outcome measures varied widely and frequently depended on neuropsychological tests with little theoretical justification or ecological relevance. Fifth, we discuss how the variability in each of these other four areas complicates efforts to examine training generalization. Overall, future studies should place greater emphasis on ecologically relevant treatment approaches and outcome measures and we propose a hierarchical model that may aid in this pursuit. (JINS, 2014, 19, 1–17)

Relatively few studies have examined the use of cognitive rehabilitation in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), largely due to the assumption that training will not improve functioning in patients with progressive conditions. Face-name association, an ecologically valid task, is both dependent on the explicit memory system and difficult for MCI patients. During three hour-long sessions, eight patients diagnosed with MCI were trained in the use of explicit memory strategies with 45 face-name pairs. For each pair, they were taught to visually identify a facial feature, link a phonological cue to that feature, and recall the associated name. There was significant improvement in recognition accuracy, along with faster reaction times, for trained face-name pairs. Improved accuracy persisted when tested one month after training. Significant, but less, improvement was also found on untrained stimuli, raising the possibility of generalization of training strategies. Preliminary results suggest strategy-based cognitive rehabilitation may be beneficial in patients with MCI, though these results must be replicated with a control group to rule out practice effects. (JINS, 2008, 14, 883–889.)

This study compared the ability of clinical and ecologic simulation measures to predict performance on environment-specific criterion measures of wayfinding. Thirty-one unilateral stroke participants comprised the right and left hemisphere groups (16 patients with left sided and 15 patients with right sided strokes). Participants completed a battery of clinical tasks (e.g., traditional paper-and-pencil measures of visualization, mental rotation, visual memory and spatial orientation), ecologic simulations (e.g., slide route recall and visualization of a model town from differing perspectives) and environment specific criterion tasks (e.g., route recall and directional orientation). The groups were equivalent in age, sex, education, handedness, and weeks since stroke. Both ecologic simulation tasks were found to have fairly good internal consistency and 1 simulation task was significantly related to real world wayfinding. Of the clinical tasks, 1 visual memory test was correlated with a directional orientation criterion task, but none correlated with route navigation ability. Results are consistent with literature purporting the benefits of ecologic simulation tasks as predictors of real world functioning. (JINS, 2001, 7, 675–682.)