MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515338172 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01266

Neural Plastic Effects of Working Memory Training Influenced by Self-perceived Stress in Stroke: A Case Illustration

2016· article· en· W2515338172 on OpenAlexafffund
Ada W. S. Leung, L. M. Barrett, Darcy Butterworth, Karin Werther, Deirdre Dawson, E. Sharon Brintnell

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of AlbertaBaycrest HospitalWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital FoundationGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital
KeywordsPsychologyTask (project management)Stress (linguistics)NeuroplasticityNeuroimagingFunctional magnetic resonance imagingWorking memoryStroke (engine)Clinical psychologyAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyCognitionMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case study examined the effects of auditory working memory (WM) training on neuroplastic changes in stroke survivors and how such effects might be influenced by self-perceived stress. Two participants with a history of stroke participated in the study. One of them had a higher level of self-perceived stress. Both participants underwent a course of auditory WM training and completed baseline and post-training assessments such as self-perceived stress, performance satisfaction questionnaires, behavioral task performance, and functional magnetic resonance imaging. They were trained on a computerized auditory WM task (n-back) 5 days a week for 6 weeks, for a total of 20 h. Participant 1 had high levels of perceived stress, both pre- and post-training, and showed improvement on the satisfaction aspect of functional engagement only. Participant 2 had lower levels of perceived stress and demonstrated improvements on all performance tasks. Neuroimaging results showed evidence of improved neural efficiency on the trained task for participant 2. The results shed light on the need to evaluate psychological influences, e.g., stress, when studying the neuroplastic changes in people with stroke. However, the case design approach and other factors that might have positively influenced outcomes mean that these results must be interpreted with a great deal of caution. Future studies using a larger sample are recommended to verify the findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207