Impact des jeux de société sur l’aspect cognitif de patients en addictologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction - Few studies have evaluated the effects of therapeutic mediation by board games for alcohol-dependent patients. This study objective was to evaluate the interest of these games among a population of patients, belonging to the addiction service called SESAME in Amiens and to study their impact on cognitive deficits related to alcohol.Material and methods - The study included 28 patients benefiting from the game workshop and 29 witnesses, assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at admission (t0) and at the end of hospitalization for complex withdrawal (t1); as well as a self-survey anda hetero-survey assessing hedonic abilities and integration into the group.Results - In the game group, the mean total MoCA scores were improved between t0 and t1 with a significant difference (MoCAt0 = 23.89 ± 3.88, MoCAt1 = 25.66 ± 4.62, t test: -2.47, p<0.01). The improved sub-scores were those associated with memory, executive and visuospatial function. There was no significant improvement in the witness group (MoCAt0 = 24.86 ± 3.96, MoCAt1 = 26.36 ± 3.40, t test: -1.53, p = 0.07). Qualitative evaluations have shown an impact on the feelings of pleasure and integration in the group.Discussion - These results suggest an interest in board games with an impact on cognitive functions, feelings of personal satisfaction and social integration. Conclusion - This workshop experiment allows the (re) discovery for most of subjects, of the pleasure to share a recreational experience. Further studies would be needed to evaluate improved cognitive functions with more in-depth neuropsychological tests.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".