MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999990834 · doi:10.2478/fon-2019-0038

A summary of the evidence and evaluation of the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for mild cognitive impairment

2019· article· en· W2999990834 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zimeng Li, Yinghui Jin, Xinghuan Wang, Lü Cui, Weijie Gao, Jinhua Si, Yan‐Hui Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers of Nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClinical practice guidelines implementation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionGuidelineCochrane LibrarySystematic reviewNiceCINAHLGrading (engineering)MEDLINEExcellenceChecklistFamily medicinePhysical therapyAlternative medicinePsychologyNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To summarize and evaluate the evidence of guidelines and systematic reviews (SRs) of nonpharmacological interventions for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to support the development of future guidelines and clinical decisions for MCI patients. Methods Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), American Academy of Neurology (AAN), Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNAHL, VIP, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database were searched for relevant publications, including guidelines and SRs, from January 2014 to March 2019. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed the publications for adherence to the inclusion criteria. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) was used to assess the quality of the guidelines, and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2) was used to assess the quality of SRs. In addition, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of outcomes. Results Thirty-two articles were retrieved, including 1 guideline and 31 SRs. Fourteen SRs of physical exercise for MCI, six articles describing cognitive interventions, four articles describing acupuncture, and seven articles assessing dietary interventions (including four articles employing a Mediterranean diet, one article using vitamin B supplementation, and two articles assessing the effects of tea, coffee, and caffeine) were included. The quality of the articles was very low for 4 (13%), low for 10 (32%), and moderate for 17 (55%). Conclusions Based on the evidence available to date, nonpharmacological interventions may improve the current cognitive function of persons with MCI. In particular, physical exercise, cognitive interventions, and acupuncture exerted promising effects. However, due to the limited number and quality of the included publications, additional high-quality reviews are needed to further confirm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.345
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers of NursingSame topicClinical practice guidelines implementationFrench-language works237,207