Effects of attention training on patients with brain damage in convalescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the effect of attention training on brain damage patients with attention disorders in convalescence.Methods In this study,60 patients with attention disorders in convalescence,who were selected by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale(MoCA Scale),were randomly divided into two groups,with 30 patients in each group.The training group were given attention training and rehabilitation nursing based on conventional rehabilitation training for two months,while the patients in the control group received conventional rehabilitation training.All the patients were assessed by simple reaction time,cancellation test and Activities of Daily Living Scale(ADL Scale) at the time of admmission,one and two month after being hospitalized.Results There was no significant difference in MoCA scores,simple reaction time,cancellation test results and ADL score between the training group and the control group at the time of admmission(P0.05).After one to two months,the simple reaction time,cancellation test results in the training group were better than those in the control group with significant difference(P0.05),while the ADL scores showed insignificant difference in two groups.The simple reaction time,cancellation test results and ADL score in both groups got better with the prolonged recovery.Conclusion Giving attention training therapy and rehabilitation nursing to brain damage patients with attention disorders in convalescence,could helpfully improve their attention and activities of daily living.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".