Effects of cognitive training program on cognitive abilities and quality of life in elderly with suspected dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dementia is most commonly found in the elderly, and related to deterioration in cognitive ability and quality of life. Therefore, prevention and delay dementia are necessary in early period especially on the elderly with suspected dementia, which in latency period and preclinical period. Objective: To study the effect of the cognitive training program for the elderly with suspected dementia on three cognitive abilities; attention, memory, and executive functions, and four areas of quality of life; physical, psychological, social relation, and environment. Methods: Ten elderly with suspected dementia as screened by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): Thai version, were purposively recruited. Participants were received the cognitive training in the program 3 times a weeks for 5 consecutive weeks. The outcome measures for assessing cognitive abilities were the Trial Making Test, the Thai Cognitive-Perceptual Test: Thai-CPT, and the Loewenstein Occupational Therapy Cognitive Test: Geriatric Version (LOTCA-G).The outcome measure for evaluating quality of life was the Quality of Life Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test. Results: After receiving the cognitive training program, the participants had significant difference in the attention post-training scores comparing to pre-training scores. Memory and executive functions scores showed no significant difference between before and after training. For the quality of life, there was a significant difference in the scores of social relation and environment domains. However, there was no significant difference in the areas of physical and mental scores. Conclusion: The cognitive training program of this study might be effective to stimulate cognitive functions of the attention skill, and quality of life in the areas of social relation and environment. Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 2015; 48(3): 182-191. Doi: 10.14456/jams.2015.18
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".