MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032623588 · doi:10.2182/cjot.05.0004

Prise en charge cognitive de la mémoire dans le vieillissement normal, les troubles cognitifs légers et la démence de type Alzheimer

2005· review· fr· W2032623588 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nathalie Bier, Johanne Desrosiers, Lise Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2005
Typereview
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicineGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the past few years, occupational therapists have been increasingly working with geriatric clients and have used interventions focused on enhancing independance and quality of life. In this area of practice, the cognitive training intervention aimed more specifically at memory disorders, is a promising intervention for the area of aging and occupational therapy. PURPOSE: The aim of this literature review is to present an overview of the fundamentals, objectives and procedures of the cognitive training intervention used with the following populations: aging people presenting a memory disorder associated with normal aging with mild cognitive impairment or with Alzheimer's disease. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A discussion on the cognitive management of memory is presented with respect to the cognitive characteristics of each of these clients.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207