Cerasa 2014.

Methods	RCT of intensive computerised attention‐training vs control group
Participants	People with a diagnosis of PD (n = 20), with no dementia (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4th edition) but predominant deficits in either attention or information processing speed, working memory, or executive function (but no deficit in other domains such as language, verbal and spatial long‐term memory). Number randomised: n = 20.
Interventions	Computerised 12 one‐hour sessions over 6 weeks performing several attention ability and information processing tasks tailored to attention deficits. Control group received simple visuo‐motor co‐ordination exercises.
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: Global cognition MMSE Spatial and verbal memory ROCFT Immediate and Delayed Recall Selective Reminding Test Visual‐spatial processing Judgment of Line Orientation (JLO) Executive function/verbal fluency Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) Sustained attention Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) Information processing speed Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test Digit span forward/backward Stroop test TMTa, TMTb, and Trail Making Test B‐A (TMTB‐A) Depression Beck Depression Inventory‐II (BDI‐II) Anxiety State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory Quality of life Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ‐39)
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Mentions random assignment only.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Participants were blind to treatment allocation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Assessors were blind.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Attrition and reasons reported.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes reported.
Other bias	Low risk	None identified.