Cognitive training in XXXX reduces @entity73 in the long term.

@entity1 @entity73 @entity191
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: @entity1 with @entity191 ( @entity191 ) are at high risk for @entity73 . Non-pharmacological interventions have attracted increasing interest for enhancing @entity191 @entity1 ' cognitive functions. METHODS: One-year follow-up data (T2 ) of a randomized controlled trial evaluating two 6-week cognitive trainings - a structured (NEUROvitalis, NV) and an unstructured (mentally fit, MF) program - compared with a waiting list control group (CG) in non-demented @entity191 @entity1 (Hoehn and Yahr I-III) are presented. Forty-seven @entity191 @entity1 were examined at T2 . Effects on overall cognitive functions (Mini-Mental State Examination and DemTect) were compared between all groups with repeated measurement analyses of variance. A combined score of the percentage change value from baseline (T0 ) to T2 was calculated to identify @entity1 who retained or improved their cognitive state (responders). The risk of developing @entity73 ( @entity73 ) was analyzed. RESULTS: Significant time * treatment effects on overall cognitive functions were found for both training groups, each compared separately to the CG (DemTect, P  <  0.05). Nine @entity1 (56.3%) of the NV group, seven (41.2%) of the MF group and three (21.4%) of the CG were responders. Comparing NV to CG the odds ratio was 4.7 [95% confidence interval (0.8; 33.3)], and comparing MF to CG it was 2.6 [95% confidence interval (0.4; 17.4)]. @entity73 risk for @entity1 without prior @entity73 was 40.0% in CG, 18.2% in MF and 18.2% in NV. The odds ratio was 3 comparing NV to CG, MF to CG. DISCUSSION: This study gives evidence that cognitive training may be effective to prevent @entity73 and onset of @entity73 in @entity191 @entity1 .
