Efficacy of a newly developed auditory–cognitive training system on speech recognition, central auditory processing and cognitive ability among older adults with normal cognition and with neurocognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of a newly developed auditory-cognitive training system on speech recognition, central auditory processing and cognition among older adults with normal cognition (NC) and with neurocognitive impairment (NCI). METHODS: A double-blind quasi-experiment was carried out on NC (n = 43) and NCI (n = 33) groups. Participants in each group were randomly assigned into treatment and control programs groups. The treatment group underwent auditory-cognitive training, whereas the control group was assigned to watch documentary videos, three times per week, for 8 consecutive weeks. Study outcomes that included Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Malay Hearing in Noise Test, Dichotic Digit Test, Gaps in Noise Test and Pitch Pattern Sequence Test were measured at 4-week intervals at baseline, and weeks 4, 8 and 12. RESULTS: Mixed design anova showed significant training effects in total Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Dichotic Digit Test in both groups, NC (P < 0.001) and NCI (P < 0.01). The NC group also showed significant training effects in the Malay Hearing in Noise Test (quiet) (P < 0.01), Gaps in Noise Test (P < 0.001) and Pitch Pattern Sequence Test (humming) (P < 0.05). All training effects were sustained up to 4 weeks after the training ended. CONCLUSIONS: The present study suggests that the newly developed auditory-cognitive training system has the potential to improve general cognition and some of the auditory processing abilities in both the NC and NCI groups. Because of the short test-retest intervals used in the present study, it is possible that the training effects were influenced by learning effect and, therefore, should be considered cautiously. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 768-773.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".