Investigating music-based cognitive rehabilitation for individuals with moderate to severe chronic acquired brain injury: A feasibility experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acquired brain injuries often cause cognitive impairment, significantly impacting participation in rehabilitation and activities of daily living. Music can influence brain function, and thus may serve as a uniquely powerful cognitive rehabilitation intervention. OBJECTIVE: This feasibility study investigated the potential effectiveness of music-based cognitive rehabilitation for adults with chronic acquired brain injury. METHODS: The control group participated in three Attention Process Training (APT) sessions, while the experimental group participated in three Music Attention Control Training (MACT) sessions. Pre-and post- testing used the Trail Making A & B, Digit Symbol, and Brown-Peterson Task as neuropsychological tests. RESULTS: ANOVA analyses showed no significant difference between groups for Trail A Test, Digit Symbol, and Brown-Peterson Task. Trail B showed significant differences at post-test favouring MACT over APT. The mean difference time between pre-and post-tests for the Trail B Test was also significantly different between APT and MACT in favour of MACT using a two-sample t-test as well as a follow-up nonparametric Mann Whitney U-test. CONCLUSIONS: The group differences found in the Trail B tests provided preliminary evidence for the efficacy of MACT to arouse and engage attention in adults with acquired brain injury.
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 | 0.001 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".