Tango programme for individuals with age-related macular degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research shows that tango dance is an absorbing and effective strategy to reduce levels of depression, while also increasing well-being. This study investigates the feasibility, acceptability, and adherence to a tango programme for individuals with age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). Depression is closely intertwined with the ARMD diagnosis, since the loss of central vision has a profoundly negative impact on the person’s quality of life. Seventeen participants were randomised to tango dance (1.5 h, 2 times/week for 4 weeks) or wait-list control condition. Demographic questions and Visual Function Questionnaire were taken at pre-test. Self-rated symptoms of depression, self-esteem, and satisfaction-with-life were assessed at pre-test and post-test. Tango group participants showed significant reductions in depression and significantly increased satisfaction-with-life and self-esteem at post-test relative to the controls, and reported physical improvement, including increased balance. Tango dance was demonstrated to be a feasible and positive activity for this population.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".