Effect of Nursing Intervention on Improving the Cognitive Function of Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To explore the effect of nursing intervention on improving the cognitive function of patients with mild cognitive impairment. Methods: Sixty patients with mild cognitive impairment in Weifang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from January 2020 to January 2021 were randomly selected for this study. They were divided into two groups: a reference group (routine follow-up and daily health education) and a research group (nursing intervention based on the reference group). Results: Before nursing, there was no significant difference in the MoCA, MMSE, ADL, SDS, and SAS scores between the two groups (p > 0.05). After intervention, the MOCA score and MMSE score of the research group were lower than those of the reference group, the ADL score of the research group was higher than that of the reference group, and the quality-of-life score of the research group was also higher than that of the reference group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Early nursing intervention for patients with mild cognitive impairment can effectively improve their cognitive functions and daily abilities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".