IMPACT OF ADAPTED DANCE ON MOOD AND PHYSICAL FUNCTION AMONG ALZHEIMER’S DISEASE ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neuropsychiatric secondary symptoms and altered physical function are prevalent among persons with Alzheimer’s Disease and related dementia disorders (ADRD) which increase healthcare costs and caregiver burden. Adapted dance is a promising intervention that may improve these symptoms and physical function. The purpose of this study is to test whether 12 weeks of adapted dance (60 min 2x/week) improves agitation, physical function, and reduces caregiver burden. An experimental crossover design will be used. ADRD residents with a Montreal Cognitive Assessment score between 6-26, Timed up and go of <20 seconds, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory Score (CMAI) of >15, and do not use oxygen or assistive device will be eligible to participate. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and every 4 weeks during each study arm for 24 weeks. Measures include CMAI and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Clinician Scale for agitation; Short Physical Performance Battery for physical function; and Zarit Burden Interview for caregiver burden.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".