Improving Cognition in Older Adults in Community Housing (ICOACH)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Mental health conditions, often associated with cognitive impairment, significantly contribute to seniors' vulnerabilities. This, in turn, reinforces the misconception that the elderly are a burden to society, further intensifying social isolation and physical disability. Growing evidence supports the use of multimodal interventions as both a preventative and therapeutic tool for seniors with mental health conditions. Our goal is to design an integrated intervention that is both feasible and tolerable, for older adult with mental illness living in senior community housing. METHOD: The ICOACH is an open-label study of a 12-week integrated program combining computerized cognitive remediation (CCR) with social and physical activities. The program's activities were iteratively modified based on qualitative analysis of participants' feedback, which was gathered through semi-structured interviews, as well as their responses to the Satisfaction and System Usability Scale (SUS). RESULT: Of the fifteen enrolled participants from 3 different community housing locations, eleven completed the full program. Reasons for withdrawal included relocating to a new residence, conflicts with other participants, and a loss of interest in the program. Baseline characteristics were for group 1 (n = 5; mean age[SD] years=75 [7.2]; mean MoCA [SD] = 20.6 [4.3]), group 2 (n = 6; mean age[SD] years=69.3 [7.2]; mean MoCA [SD] = 22 [3.8]) and group 3 (n = 4; mean age[SD] years=71 [10]; mean MoCA [SD] = 18.5 [4.2]). All participants were highly satisfied with the program, notably 72.7% of participants agreed or somewhat agreed that the program had improved their quality of life in their housing. There was an upward trend in the usability of the CCR component, with each successive group showing improved usability. Attendance for social activities was the highest across all groups, followed by CCR and then physical activities. Conflicting participants' medical and social appointments and site-related logistical issues were main external barriers for attendance. Internal barriers included reported cognitive difficulties and low motivation. The role of the interventionist and break time were highly regarded as key facilitating factors. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that an integrated program is well tolerated among older adults with mental health conditions living in community housing, and highlighted key barriers for program implementation in this setting.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».