The effects of 7‐week cognitive training in patients with vascular cognitive impairment, no dementia (the Cog‐VACCINE study): A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Evidence for the efficacy of cognitive training in patients with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment no dementia is still lacking. METHODS: A randomized, active controlled design using multidomain, adaptive, computerized cognitive training for 30 minutes, 5 days/week for 7 weeks. Assessments included global cognitive function and executive function (primary outcomes) and brain functional connectivity and structural changes (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Sixty patients were randomized across three medical centers in Beijing. At the end of the intervention, the cognitive training group showed significant improvement in Montreal Cognitive Assessment relative to the active control group (P = .013) and significantly increased functional connectivity between the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, which was significantly correlated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment change (P = .017). DISCUSSION: Computerized cognitive training significantly improved global cognitive function, which was supported by the improved brain plasticity. Incorporation of biomarkers should be implemented in cognitive training trials.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".