The Effect of Vitamin B12, Physical and Cognitive Activity on Idiopathic Forgetfulness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of physical activity, vitamin B supplementation and mental activity on cognitive functions in middle-aged individuals with subjective forgetfulness. Methods: We included 82 people between 40-65 years of age who were admitted to Erciyes University Faculty of Medicine, Family Medicine and Neurology Departments polyclinics with the complaint of subjective forgetfulness between May 2017 and May 2018. General physical examination, blood tests including B12, folic acid level and thyroid functions were performed. In addition to the socio-demographic questionnaire, Beck Anxiety and Beck Depression Scale, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test, Visual and Verbal Memory Tests were performed. Sixty-eight subjects were randomly allocated to 3 groups as cognitive activity, physical activity and vitamin B supplementation. The physical activity group made a minimum of half-hour brisk walk daily. The cognitive activity group was asked to solve a hooked puzzle every day. Vitamin supplement group used daily vitamin B complex. At the end of the third month, cognitive tests and B12 blood level test were repeated. Results: Improvement in cognitive functions was found only in the walking group. Long-term visual memory and verbal memory sub-test scores improved significantly in all groups. There were some differences between the groups in terms of verbal memory subtest scores. Conclusion: In people with forgetfulness, walking, puzzle and vitamin B supplementation seem to have positive effects even after a period of three months in terms of cognitive functions and memory. Keywords: dementia, cognitive activity, exercise, physical, B vitamins
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".