Preliminary Support for a Cognitive Remediation Intervention for Women During the Menopausal Transition: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Menopause is associated with physical and emotional symptoms, and subjective cognitive concerns that are generally not borne out on objective cognitive measures. This discrepancy suggests that a psychological rather than biological mechanism likely mediates the cognitive concerns of women in menopause. The current study assessed the feasibility and effectiveness of a cognitive remediation intervention with the goal of reducing subjective perceptions of cognitive difficulty during the menopause. Methods: Twenty-seven menopausal women (M age = 53.74, SD = 4.14) completed a 5-week group-based intervention (with a post-group booster) consisting of 2-h weekly sessions. Participants completed pre- and post-intervention measures capturing subjective cognitive ability, mood, anxiety, stress, personality, and objective cognitive tests. The primary variable of interest was self-reported cognitive confidence measured by the Memory and Cognitive Confidence Scale (MACCS). Results: All but one MACCS subscale significantly decreased over the course of treatment (with lower scores associated with higher confidence) and effect sizes ranged from small to large (d = −0.39 to −0.91) with gains maintained at 1-month follow-up. Interestingly, no change in objective cognitive test performance was observed, indicating increases in subjective cognitive confidence in the absence of objective cognitive improvement. There was no change in mood, anxiety, or stress scores. Two-level HLM analyses revealed that those with higher baseline neuroticism, as measured by the NEO Personality Inventory, had smaller decreases in post-group MACCS High Standards subscale relative to those with lower baseline neuroticism ( p = 0.027, d = −0.45). Those with higher baseline depression scores on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21) had a smaller decrease in post-intervention MACCS Total Score relative to those with lower depression ratings. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first feasibility study of its kind targeting perceptions of cognitive impairment during menopause. Although generally well-tolerated, recruitment and scheduling difficulties were flagged as challenges to engagement while a small sample size and lack of control group limit conclusions about efficacy. Providing current results could be replicated with enhanced methods, these results provide support that cognitive remediation is a feasible and credible treatment, and may improve quality of life for women in menopause. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier: NCT03311880.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".