MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137984170 · doi:10.1177/08919887211002661

“Train Your Brain” Cognitive Intervention Group Program for Singaporean Older Adult Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Pilot Feasibility Study

2021· article· en· W3137984170 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kim A. Granland, Claire Thompson, YanHong Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceCognitionPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The “Train Your Brain” (TYB) cognitive intervention group program was developed based on previous research with the goal of remediating cognitive impairments for elderly Singaporean people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This study reports a pilot evaluation of feasibility (defined as participant attendance, retention rate, satisfaction and usefulness) and preliminary efficacy of the TYB program. Nineteen participants with MCI aged ≥ 50 years were recruited from a memory clinic in Singapore, with 14 receiving the TYB intervention. Participants were allocated in order of recruitment into consecutive identical groups for a 9-session program on brain health and cognitive training. Participants received pre- and post-intervention measures of cognition and completed feedback forms reporting on satisfaction with, and utility of, the TYB program. TYB was well attended (85% attendance for the first 6 sessions; 83% for the full 9-session TYB program). Participant satisfaction was high, with positive participant feedback reporting that TYB offered useful cognitive strategies which participants could implement in their daily life. Despite the small sample size and absence of control group, repeated-measures t-tests revealed significant pre- to post-intervention intra-individual improvement in global cognition measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and in executive function on the Brixton Spatial Anticipation Test. This pilot study provides supportive preliminary evidence for feasibility of TYB, with suggestions of efficacy of this program as a culturally and linguistically appropriate intervention for English-speaking older adults with MCI in Singapore.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geriatric Psychiatry and NeurologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207