Objectives: This umbrella review synthesized and critically evaluated evidence from systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Therapy (RAT) and Computerized Training (CT) for individuals with dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), with a focus on cognitive, psychosocial, and functional outcomes. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across six databases: PubMed, IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, ACM Digital Library, and EBSCOhost. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251117930). Included reviews were appraised using AMSTAR-2 and ROBIS, while the methodological limitations of primary studies were synthesized from the limitations reported by the included reviews. Narrative synthesis, overlap analysis using the Corrected Covered Area (CCA), and GRADE assessments were performed. Results: Sixteen systematic reviews published between 2017 and 2025, encompassing 324 unique primary studies, met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was generally poor: twelve reviews were rated as having “Critically Low” confidence using AMSTAR-2, while nine were judged to be at ‘High Risk of Bias’ using ROBIS; methodological shortcomings included inadequate or absent assessment of risk of bias in the included primary studies in several reviews. Overlap analysis (CCA = 0.53%) identified two distinct evidence structures. The RAT literature demonstrated a concentrated citation pattern, with recurrent evidence for selected psychosocial outcomes. In contrast, the CT literature was highly fragmented, with divergent findings regarding specific cognitive domains including processing speed and memory recall, largely attributable to non-overlapping evidence bases rather than true scientific disagreement. Consequently, the umbrella-level certainty of evidence was rated as ‘Very Low’ for both RAT and CT across the broad psychosocial and cognitive outcome domains, reflecting serious concerns regarding risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Conclusions: RAT showed potential benefits for selected psychosocial outcomes, particularly depression, anxiety, positive emotion, and social interaction. However, the current evidence remains insufficient to establish the clinical effectiveness of either RAT or CT across broader cognitive, psychosocial, and functional outcomes. Future research should prioritize large-scale, pre-registered, methodologically rigorous trials with standardized core outcome measures to generate reliable evidence for clinical decision-making and dementia care.