Investigation of combined treatment of acupuncture and neurofeedback for improving cognitive function in mild neurocognitive disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mild neurocognitive disorder (MND) is an intermediate state that can progress to dementia, and the cognitive reserve of MND is an important task in preventing dementia. Acupuncture and neurofeedback (NF) training have been used to improve cognitive function and treat MND or dementia, but their effectiveness remains controversial. In this trial, we will evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined NF-acupuncture treatment in comparison with single acupuncture treatment. METHODS AND DESIGN: This study is a randomized, assessor-blind, pilot trial. It is designed in accordance with the Standards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture. A total of 44 MND participants who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be enrolled, and each will be randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups of 22 subjects. Each subject will visit 24 times over 12 weeks and receive either acupuncture or NF-acupuncture combined treatment. At visit 25 (week 13), a follow-up evaluation will be performed, and then the investigator will analyze the results. The primary outcome is defined by the Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score from screening to visit 25. The secondary outcome includes the following: change in Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive, the Korean version of the Beck Depression Inventory, Body Awareness Questionnaire, delayed matching to sample task scores, and functional near-infrared spectroscopy values, from visit 1 to visit 25; heart rate variability values from visit 1 to visit 5, visit 9, visit 13, visit 21, visit 25; breath per minute values from visit 1 to visit 1 to 25. DISCUSSION: We will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of combined NF-acupuncture therapy, and expect that it will serve as the basis for the use of NF together with acupuncture in the clinical setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: KCT0004972 (registered in Clinical Research Information Service of the Republic of Korea, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/16239).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".