MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943378471

작업 중심 회상치료가 경도 치매 노인 환자의 인지기능과 우울, 삶의 질에 미치는 영향

2018· article· ko· W2943378471 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
박주형

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentGeriatric Depression ScaleDementiaPsychologyMedicineCognitionCognitive impairmentDepressive symptomsPsychiatryInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

본 연구는 작업 중심 회상치료가 경도 치매 노인 환자의 인지기능과 우울 그리고 그들의 삶의 질에 미치는 영향을 알아보고자 실시되었다. 경도 치매 노인 환자 31명을 대상으로, 총 8주 동안 주 1회, 각 회기 당 40분의 작업 중심 회상치료를 실시하였다. 평가도구는 대상자의 인지기능 평가를 위해서 한국형 몬트리올 인지평가(Montreal Cognitive Assessment Korean Version:MoCA-K), 우울정도 측정을 위해 단축형 한국판 노인우울척도검사(Short Form of Geriatric Depression Scale-Korean Version:SGDS-K), 그리고 대상자들의 삶의 질 측정을 위해 치매노인 대상 삶의 질 척도(Geriatric Quality of Life-Dementia:GQOL-D)를 사용하였다. 연구결과 작업 중심 회상치료 실시 전에 비하여 경도 치매 노인 환자의 MoCA-K 점수는 중재 전 14.62±5.07에서 중재 후 16.88±4.55로, SGDS-K 점수는 중재 전 7.28±4.28에서 중재 후 6.10±4.09로, 마지막으로 GQOL-D 점수는 중재 전 26.05±5.45에서 중재 후 28.55±5.74로 변화하여 측정된 모든 항목에서 통계적으로 유의미한 긍정적 변화를 확인할 수 있었다. 본 연구 결과를 토대로 작업 중심 회상훈련이 경도 치매 노인 환자들의 인지기능, 우울 그리고 삶의 질에 긍정적 영향을 미칠 수 있다는 가능성을 확인할 수 있었다.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation SocietySame topicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207