Improvement of Episodic Memory in Persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Healthy Older Adults: Evidence from a Cognitive Intervention Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of cognitive training was assessed in persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and persons with normal cognitive aging. Forty-seven participants were included in this study: 28 with MCI and 17 controls. Twenty-one participants received intervention (20 MCI and 9 controls) and 16 participants (8 MCI and 8 controls) received no intervention (waiting-list group). The intervention focused on teaching episodic memory strategies. Three tasks of episodic memory (list recall, face-name association, text memory) were used as primary outcome measures. Results were analyzed using analyses of variance. The intervention effect (pre- and post-intervention difference) was significant on two of the primary outcome measures (delayed list recall and face-name association). A significant pre-post-effect was also found on measures of subjective memory and well-being. There was no improvement in the performance of groups of individuals with MCI and normal elderly persons who did not receive the intervention. These results suggest that persons with MCI can improve their performance on episodic memory when provided with cognitive training.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".