The effect of hierarchical executive function training on stroke survivors′ executive dysfunction during recovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore the effect of hierarchical executive function training on executive dysfunction among stroke survivors. Methods Thirty-six recovering stroke survivors with executive dysfunction were randomly divided into an experimental group (n=18) and a control group (n=18). Both groups received routine rehabilitation training and medication for three weeks, but the experimental group also received working memory training, inhibitory control training, set shifting training, and central executive function training. Before and after the training, everyone′s cognitive functioning was screened using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and executive functioning was evaluated using the digit span test (DST), the color trail test (CTT), the complex fluency test and the simple fluency test. Results Before the training there were no significant differences in clinical indicators between the two groups. After the treatment, the average MoCA, DST, CTT complex fluency test and simple fluency test scores of the experimental group had all improved significantly, but no significant improvement in any of the measurements was observed in the control group except for a significant improvement in their average MoCA score. Conclusion Hierarchical executive function training can improve the sub-components of executive function among recovering stroke survivors, including working memory, set shifting and fluency. Key words: Stroke; Executive function
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".