Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the beneficial effects of a new cognitive intervention program designed for the care and prevention of dementia, namely Learning Therapy. The training program used systematized basic problems in arithmetic and Japanese language as training tasks. In study 1, 16 individuals in the experimental group and 16 in the control group were recruited from a nursing home. In both groups, all individuals were clinically diagnosed with senile dementia of the Alzheimer type. In study 2, we performed a single-blind, randomized controlled trial in our cognitive intervention program of 124 community-dwelling seniors. In both studies, the daily training program using reading and arithmetic tasks was carried out approximately 5 days a week, for 15 to 20 minutes a day in the intervention groups. Neuropsychological measures were determined simultaneously in the groups both prior to and after six months of the intervention. The results of our investigations indicate that our cognitive intervention using reading and arithmetic problems demonstrated a transfer effect and they provide convincing evidence that cognitive training maintains and improves the cognitive functions of dementia patients and healthy seniors.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".