P3‐400: Non‐pharmacological intervention: Effectiveness of a multi‐component rehabilitation program on cognitive functions of people with mild cognitive impairement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the Day Care Centre of the Athens Association of Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders, people with dementia and their families can attend a wide range of non pharmachological therapies (cognitive training, cognitive stimulation, reminiscence therapy, reality orientation therapy, physical exercise, stress management programme, psychoeducation programme etc). The present study evaluates the results of an intervention program for people with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) including cognitive and physical training and compares them with a random control group of people with MCI. 24 MCI patients aged 70 (± 7) years participated in a three-hour program delivered twice a week for 8 months and were compared with a control group of 20 MCI patients aged 67 years (± 8). Demographics were recorded for both groups. Patients’ cognitive performance was measured before and after the intervention (Mini Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Clock Drawing Test, Verbal Fluency, BNT-15, Simplified Rey Figure). The statistical package for the social science (SPSS, version 13) was used to analyse data collected. The intervention group showed improvement at the end of the eight-month period in most of the psychometric test. MoCA (F = 6.82, p = .017 and Verbal Fluency (F = 24.66, p = .001) significantly differed between the intervention and control group according to the analysis of covariance that was conducted.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".