MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109507294 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2013.05.1323

P3–250: A brain fitness program for people with dementia concurrent with a support group for their caregivers is feasible

2013· article· en· W2109507294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bryan J. Neth, Henry G. Colmer, Christina E. Hugenschmidt, Suzanne Fitzsimmons, Edward Shaw, Rabeena Alli, Dan Sun, Doug Henningsen, Jon Mugweru, Kaycee M. Sink

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMoodPsychologyGeriatric Depression ScaleMontreal Cognitive AssessmentAttendanceCognitionPhysical therapyGerontologyCognitive impairmentClinical psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caregiver (CG) support groups are widely available for CGs of persons with dementia (PWD). When a CG attends a support group, the PWD is left home either alone or with another CG. In this abstract we describe the implementation and feasibility of a brain fitness program (BFP) for PWD that occurs concurrently with a support group for their CGs. PWD of any type or stage were invited to participate in a cognitive support program based upon activities from Brain Fitness by Suzanne Fitzsimmons (Venture Publishing, 2008). Each session consisted of stretching, motor activity and cognitively stimulating activities focused on memory, attention, executive functioning, sensory input, and language. The BFP was run concurrently with a support group for each participant's CG. Participants are administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) at the first and last session. Additionally, a simple 4-item, 6-point visual analogue scale was developed for participants to rate their mood and cognition at each session. The first offering of the BFP began in 9/2012 and served 16 PWD at two sites, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center (WFBMC, N=6) and a nearby Adult Day Center (ADC, N=10). Participants who came to the first session had an average attendance of 70% for the WFBMC group and 84% for the ADC group. Participants were able and willing to complete the MoCA, GDS, and the 4-item scale. The mean MoCA score was 12 (SD=3.4, range 7–18) and the mean GDS 2.3 (SD=1.7, range 0–5). Self-rated mood and cognition was consistent over the course of the program. Average mean scores at the beginning and end of the program for “How do you feel about your life?” were 4.95 and 5.06 respectively; and “How do you think your memory is compared to others?” were 3.70 and 3.88. Running a cognitive support program for PWD concurrently with a CG support group is feasible and well received by families affected by dementia. This program enhanced the comprehensiveness of mental health services offered. More data are needed on the efficacy of this program (e.g., potential effects on mood and cognition).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207