To the Editor Roberts et al1 present the results of a randomized clinical trial comparing a commercially available working memory (WM) intervention, Cogmed (Pearson), with an education-as-usual control for children screened for low WM capacity. Although they found some improvements in WM, there was no benefit on academic achievement measures 6 months following intervention. The authors imply that Cogmed is not worth the considerable cost in time, effort, and financial resources required to carry out a large-scale program of training.
Katz B, Shah P. The Jury Is Still Out on Working Memory Training. JAMA Pediatr. 2016;170(9):907-908. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.1237