MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014659317 · doi:10.2196/resprot.2899

A Rehabilitation Tool Designed for Intensive Web-Based Cognitive Training: Description and Usability Study

2013· article· en· W2014659317 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityRehabilitationCognitionCognitive rehabilitation therapyNeuropsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCognitive trainingMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Acquired brain injuryPhysical therapyPsychologyComputer scienceNursingHuman–computer interactionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive deficits are among the most disabling of neurological diseases and have a serious impact on the quality of life of patients and families. Cognitive training has been proven successful in improving or compensating for neuropsychological deficits after acute brain injury, but its efficacy highly depends on the intensity of treatment over an extended period of time. Therefore, cognitive training indicates expensive human resources and renders the rehabilitation process vulnerable to physical and economic barriers for the majority of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and test a new Web-based rehabilitation tool that provides intensive cognitive training at home under clinical prescription and monitoring, at affordable costs. METHODS: From a pool of 60 original exercises, designed and used over the past 10 years for cognitive training at our center, we developed 27 exercises on a computer game format, with automatic increase or decrease of difficulty levels. These exercises were assembled in a clean, user-friendly design and covered various cognitive domains such as attention (n=4), memory (n=11), language (n=3), calculus (n=3), praxis (n=2), and executive functions (n=3). A Web 2.0 platform was also designed to provide medical prescription of cognitive training sessions, performed at the patient's home. These sessions included continuous monitoring of compliance, performance, and evolution; algorithms for automatic adjustment and long-term learning through use, and database recording of all activities. The end-user interaction test included 80 patients from our memory clinic from several groups including subjective memory complaints (n=20), traumatic brain injury (n=20), stroke and other static brain lesions (n=20), and mild Alzheimer's disease (n=20). During a 1-hour session, patients and their relatives were taught to use the system and allowed to practice using it. At the end of the session, they were asked to complete a questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 48/80 patients (60%) attended the training session. The mean age of the patients was 60 years (SD 13.3, range 41-78), and the mean level of formal education was 6 years (range 4-16). Of all the participants, 32/48 patients (66%) have previously used a computer. All patients and their relatives made a positive evaluation of the cognitive training tool. Only 2/48 patients (4%) were not interested in performing the exercises at home; 19/48 patients (39%) mentioned the need for further coaching from a relative or health care professional. The patients who mentioned difficulties in performing the exercises have not used the computer earlier. CONCLUSIONS: This new Web-based system was very well accepted by patients and their relatives, who showed high levels of motivation to use it on a daily basis at home. The simplicity of its use and comfort were especially outlined. This tool will have an important effect on human resource management, in increasing the patient access to specialized health care and improving the quality and national health system costs of rehabilitation programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.467
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.088 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it