Verification of Preventive Effect of Dual-Task and N-Back Task- Incorporated Music Therapy against Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Alzheimer’s dementia (AD) is the most dominant (more than 60%) in the whole dementia and the incidence of AD for people at age 65 years or older becomes twice with an increase in age by 5 years, so the development of countermeasures against it is an urgent issue. For improving cognitive functions, the effectiveness of dual-task (a task for which two different things are performed at the same time) and that of n-back task (a task for which delayed recall of a thing performed at n times ago is carried out) have been verified. In addition, we have also verified that distress has negative effects on cognitive functions. Hence, we started dual-task- and n-back task-incorporated intervention geared toward elderly people living in Kashihara-city. In this method, music therapy was adopted for the distress reduction and the eustress enhancement. The purposes of this study are to verify the preventive effect against dementia by the dual-task- and n-back task-incorporated music therapy and to measure the effect of music therapy on the distress reduction. In this study, the intervention group and the control group were compared during the intervention for three months. Methods: A screening test for mild cognitive impairment was carried out with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA test). Stress check was performed by collecting sublingual saliva and measuring α-amylase. Analysis was conducted with t-test corresponding to the comparison between the intervention group and the control group. Results: The intervention group showed significant improvement of cognitive functions and a decrease in distress, compared to the control group. Conclusion: The dual-task- and n-back task-incorporated music therapy improved cognitive functions and reduced distress. To verify this repeatedly to refine the technique and to accumulate effective programs are our future tasks.
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".