Effect of Chinese reading aloud training on cognitive function in patients with vascular cognitive impairment no dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effect of Chinese reading aloud training (c-RAT) on cognitive function and activities of daily living in patients with vascular cognitive impairment no dementia (VCIND). Methods From January 2018 to January 2019, totally 80 patients with VCIND in the General Hospital of Xingtai Mining Group were enrolled.Subjects were randomized grouped into c-RAT group (n=43) and control group (n=37). The c-RAT group was asked to read aloud the Chinese paper for 5 days a week for 12 weeks.At the time of enrollment and 12 weeks after the intervention, the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), trail making test (TMT), auditory verb learn test (AVLT), digit symbol substitution test (DSST) and modified Barthel index (MBI) were filled out. Results Compared with control group, the difference of D-value in c-RAT group was statistically significant in MoCA total scores(4.00(2.00), 1.50(0.50), Z=3.012, P=0.003), scores of MoCA-Visual space execution (2.00(1.00), 0.00(2.00), Z=2.787, P=0.008), MoCA-attention (1.00(1.00), 0.00(0.50), Z=2.369, P=0.022), MoCA-language (1.00(1.00), 0.00(0.75), Z=3.049, P=0.000)and MoCA-delayed recall(2.00(2.00), 0.00(1.00), Z=2.043, P=0.014), TMT-A scores (-8.00(23.00), 10.50(30.25), Z=2.120, P=0.039), AVLT scores (1earning)(3.00(2.00), 0.50(0.75), Z=2.266, P=0.039) , AVLT scores (recall)(2.00(1.00), 0.00(1.00), Z=2.974, P=0.003)、AVLT scores (recognition) (2.00(0.00), 0.50(1.50), Z=3.054, P=0.000)and DSST scores ((4.96±0.71), (2.39±0.78), t=2.572, P=0.014), while there were no significant differences in the rest parts of MoCA, TMT-B and MBI(P>0.05). The increased scores in DSST were positively correlated (r=0.205, P=0.006) with the number of reading aloud tasks finished. Conclusion C-RAT can improve general cognition, especially in information processing speed, executive function, attention and auditory memory. Key words: Learning therapy; Mild cognitive impairment; Vascular dementia; Information processing speed
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".