Desenvolvimento de programas de estimulação cognitiva para adultos idosos: modalidades da Literatura e da Neuropsicologia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considering the import increase of longevity in the world and in Brazil, interventions of health promotion and education specific to healthy elderly adults are essential and socially relevant. This paper presents the planning of two programs of cognitive intervention for adults 60-80 years of age in the indirect mode, literature, and direct, of neuropsychology. From the specific national and international bibliography and the technique of brainstorming with professionals involved in the intervention area were built two programs to be administered in groups of up to 10 people, with neuropsychological assessment pre-and post-intervention in 12 sessions lasting an hour and a half. The intervention program arising from the literature proposes activities involving oral and written language, modality literary poetry. The intervention program includes activities derived from the neuropsychology of cognitive training with specific techniques of stimulation of four components of the cognitive function of working memory. Such programs appear to answer the methodological suggestions in the knowledge of the area and should be developed with two groups of elderly adults to verify their effectiveness in human cognition. It intends to stimulate the promotion of more interventive actions by means of a multidisciplinary approach to cognitive stimulation of elderly people.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".