MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effect of Dual task Program on Reducing the Risk of Dementia in older Adults

2017· article· en· W2752924996 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Journal of Pharmacy and Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaDual (grammatical number)Task (project management)GerontologyMedicineDual purposePhysical therapyEngineeringInternal medicineDiseaseMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of a dual task program on prevention to dementia in old adult. Methods/Statistical analysis: Forty-four people were selected as subjects with a high risk of developing dementia. Using a Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, cognitive function was recorded; the Short Form of the Geriatric Depression Scale and the Korean version of the Quality of Life-Alzheimer’s Disease were administered pre- and post-evaluation to determine the changes in levels of depression and quality of life. Paired t tests were conducted using SPSS Version 12.0. Findings: The results indicated that the dual task program affected cognitive function and quality of life in older adults with a higher risk of developing dementia. The level of depression decreased after the intervention, but there was no statistically significant difference. In these studies, dual task programs included the synchronized use of both hands, integration of the bilateral side, and bimanual activity of inserting to facilitate cognitive function. Additionally, through the process of making procedures, the dual task program consisted of contents that enhance cognitive functions and motor functions. As a result, the dual task has been shown to be effective in preventing dementia. The dual task program was designed to improve cognitive functions and quality of life of those in an older population with a higher risk of developing dementia. Improvements/Applications: Applying the dual task program to elderly subjects at a high risk of developing dementia was confirmed to prevent dementia.

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.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.488 · 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