Memory impairment following an acquired brain injury can negatively impact daily living and quality of life—but can be reduced by memory rehabilitation. Here, we review the literature on four approaches for memory rehabilitation and their associated strategies: (1) the restorative approach, aimed at a return to pre-morbid functioning, (2) the knowledge acquisition approach, involving training on specific information relevant to daily life, (3) the compensatory approach, targeted at improving daily functioning, and (4) the holistic approach, in which social, emotional, and behavioral deficits are addressed alongside cognitive consequences of acquired brain injury. Each memory rehabilitation approach includes specific strategies such as drill and practice (restorative), spaced retrieval (knowledge acquisition), memory aids (compensatory), or a combination of psychotherapy and cognitive strategies (holistic). Past research has demonstrated mixed support for the use of restorative strategies to improve memory function, whereas knowledge acquisition strategies show promising results on trained tasks but little generalization to untrained tasks and activities of daily living. Compensatory strategies remain widely used but require intensive training to be effectively employed. Finally, the holistic approach is becoming more widespread due to improvements in psychosocial wellbeing, yet there are considerable resource and cost requirements. Several factors can influence rehabilitation outcomes including metacognition and emotional disturbances. Considerations for future research to improve the applicability of strategies for memory rehabilitation include assessing memory impairment severity, examining memory needs in daily life, and exploring the long-term effects of memory rehabilitation.

Subjective memory evaluation is important for assessing memory abilities and complaints alongside objective measures. In research and clinical settings, questionnaires are used to examine perceived memory ability, memory complaints, and memory beliefs/knowledge. Although they provide a structured measure of self-reported memory, there is some debate as to whether subjective evaluation accurately reflects memory abilities. Specifically, the disconnect between subjective and objective memory measures remains a longstanding issue within the field. Thus, it is essential to evaluate the benefits and limitations of questionnaires that are currently in use. This review encompasses three categories of metamemory questionnaires: self-efficacy, complaints, and multidimensional questionnaires. Factors influencing self-evaluation of memory including knowledge and beliefs about memory, ability to evaluate memory, recent metamemory experiences, and affect are examined. The relationship between subjective and objective memory measures is explored and considerations for future development and use of metamemory questionnaires are provided.