Clinical Observation on the Effect of Systematic Nursing Intervention on Cognitive Function, Life Activity Ability, and Quality of Life of Senile Dementia Patients
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To explore the influence of systematic nursing intervention on the life ability and quality of senile dementia patients. Methods. Total of 82 senile dementia patients who were admitted to our hospital from January 2018 to January 2020 were divided into two groups according to the random number table, and the nursing intervention was analyzed. 41 patients in the control group were given routine nursing care, and 41 patients in the observation group were given systematic nursing intervention. Patients were assessed cognitively using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA). The Barthel index and SF-36 were used to evaluate the patients’ daily activity function and quality of life. A Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) was used to assess mental distress. The Social-Adaptive Function Rating Scale (SAFE) and Social Skills Inventory (SSC) were used to evaluate the patients’ social interaction ability before and after nursing intervention. Nursing satisfaction was distributed to patients in the form of a self-prepared nursing satisfaction questionnaire for scoring. Results. After the nursing intervention, the MoCA scores of patients in the two groups were higher than those before the nursing intervention, and the scores in the observation group were higher than those in the control group P < 0.05 . After the nursing intervention, the Barthel index scores of patients in the two groups were higher than those before the nursing intervention, and the scores in the observation group were higher than those in the control group P < 0.05 . After the nursing intervention, the SF-36 scores of patients in the two groups were higher than those before the nursing intervention, and the scores in the observation group were higher than those in the control group P < 0.05 . After nursing intervention, the SCL-90-R scores of patients in the two groups were lower than those before nursing intervention, and the scores in the observation group were lower than those in the control group P < 0.05 . After the nursing intervention, the SAFE scores of patients in the two groups were lower than those before the nursing intervention, and the safe scores of the observation group were lower than those of the control group P < 0.05 . After the nursing intervention, the SSC scores of patients in the two groups were lower than those before the nursing intervention, and the scores in the observation group were lower than those in the control group P < 0.05 . After nursing intervention, the total satisfaction degree of the control group (80.49%) was lower than that of the observation group (97.56%) P < 0.05 . Conclusion. The implementation of systematic nursing intervention is conducive to improve the cognitive function, activity of life, and quality of life of senile dementia patients who have a positive effect, and nursing satisfaction is higher.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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".