[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-468865-105":59,"doc-detail-468865-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","user-experience-with-two-computerized-cognitive-intervention-programs-for-people-with-mild-cognitive-impairment","User experience with two computerized cognitive intervention programs for people with mild cognitive impairment","","Background Computerized cognitive training (CCT) can help people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), yet it must be user-friendly and easy to manage for this population. Objective The study assessed user experience for two CCT programs in a secondary data analysis. Methods Within BrainFit-Nutrition (N=270), an individualized CCT (iCCT) using machine learning was compared with a basic CCT (bCCT). User Experience Questionnaire results were analyzed at t6-follow-up.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/user-experience-with-two-computerized-cognitive-intervention-programs-for-people-with-mild-cognitive-impairment/468865/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/user-experience-with-two-computerized-cognitive-intervention-programs-for-people-with-mild-cognitive-impairment/468865.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Chumphorn","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-03","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the objective of the study?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To evaluate user experience with two computerized cognitive training programs developed for people with mild cognitive impairment, using secondary data analysis.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were the two CCT programs different?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The individualized CCT (iCCT) used a machine learning system and included more exercises, while the basic CCT (bCCT) used fewer exercises and did not use machine learning.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What did the results show about satisfaction between programs?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"For five of six UEQ scales, there were no significant differences between programs; only the Perspicuity scale was higher for bCCT than for iCCT. Training intensity correlated positively with several UEQ aspects.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},468865,1791022107,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":52,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},2336475401981,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/22000c94efd8d5204d?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1786935347598174694","Scheuermann et al. BMC Geriatrics (2026) 26:29 BMC Geriatrics  \n[https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06767-y](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06767-y)  \nRESEARCH Open Access  \nUser experience with two computerized cognitive intervention programs for people with mild cognitive impairment  \nJulia-Sophia Scheuermann 1*, Elmar Graessel 1, Martin Schmitt 1 and Petra Scheerbaum 1  \nAbstract  \nBackground Computerized cognitive training (CCT) is effective for people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) . But CCT must be “user friendly” and easy to handle for this target group.  \nObjective The aim of this study was to evaluate in a secondary data analysis the user experience with two CCT programs developed for people with MCI.  \nMethods In the framework of the randomized controlled study BrainFit-Nutrition (N = 270), two CCTs were examined: an individualized CCT (iCCT) with a machine learning system and more exercises versus a basic CCT (bCCT) with less exercises and without machine learning: both containing a set of cognitive training tasks. The User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) was used to evaluate user satisfaction with the two CCTs at t6-follow-up (nUX=217; nUX−iCCT=109; nUX−bCCT=108) . In addition to the benchmark, we examined, first, the differences between the CCTs; second, the correlation between self-reported training intensity and user satisfaction; and third, age and gender differences in the use of the CCTs.  \nResults For both CCT programs, the benchmark was above average or good for all scales. There were no significant differences between the CCT programs in 5 of the 6 UEQ scales. Only the Perspicuity scale showed significantly higher values for the bCCT than for the iCCT. Training intensity was positively correlated with the UEQ aspects Attractiveness, and hedonic quality (i. e. the scales Stimulation and Novelty) for each CCT program.  \nConclusion Both CCT programs are user-friendly tools for individuals with MCI aged 60 years and older. Participants who used one of the CCT programs more frequently were more satisfied with the hedonic quality of the CCT program, whereby the training intensity of the iCCT was descriptively higher than in the bCCT. The results are very important, due to the rising number of persons with MCI and the need to offer various non-pharmacological intervention, that can be offered at a low threshold.  \nTrial registration ISRCTN10560738; registered November 23, 2021.  \nKeywords User experience questionnaire, User experience, Mild cognitive impairment, Computerized cognitive training  \n*Correspondence:  \nJulia-Sophia Scheuermann [Julia-sophia.scheuermann@uk-erlangen.de](Julia-sophia.scheuermann@uk-erlangen.de)  \n1Center for Health Services Research in Medicine, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Uniklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-AlexanderUniversität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Schwabachanlage 6,  \nErlangen D-91054, Germany  \n© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit [http://creativecommons.org/l](http://creativecommons.org/l)icenses/by/4.0/.  \nScheuermann et al. BMC Geriatrics (2026) 26:29  \nIntroduction  \nMild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a transition between normal aging and dementia symptoms [1]. The prevale","cbCaiczz9YxP6t3b","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiczz9YxP6t3b","pdf",1925982,"English","# Abstract\n## Background\n## Objective\n## Methods\n## Results\n## Conclusion\n# Introduction\n## Mild cognitive impairment and dementia risk\n## Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions\n## Role of computerized cognitive training\n## Need for usability","[{\"question\":\"What was the objective of the study?\",\"answer\":\"To evaluate user experience with two computerized cognitive training programs developed for people with mild cognitive impairment, using secondary data analysis.\"},{\"question\":\"How were the two CCT programs different?\",\"answer\":\"The individualized CCT (iCCT) used a machine learning system and included more exercises, while the basic CCT (bCCT) used fewer exercises and did not use machine learning.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the results show about satisfaction between programs?\",\"answer\":\"For five of six UEQ scales, there were no significant differences between programs; only the Perspicuity scale was higher for bCCT than for iCCT. Training intensity correlated positively with several UEQ aspects.\"}]","User experience with two computerized cognitive intervention programs for people with mild cognitive impairment | PDF",1790774777,25]