Improvisational Movement to Improve Quality of Life in Older Adults With Early-Stage Dementia: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease has profound effects on quality of life, affecting not only cognition, but mobility and opportunities for social engagement. Dance is a form of movement that may be uniquely suited to help maintain quality of life for older adults, including those with dementia, because it inherently incorporates movement, social engagement, and cognitive stimulation. Here, we describe the methods and results of the pilot study for the IMOVE trial (NCT03333837, www.clinicaltrials.gov), a clinical trial designed to use improvisational dance classes to test the effects of movement and social engagement in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early-stage dementia. The pilot study was an 8-week investigation into the feasibility and potential effects of an improvisational dance intervention on people with MCI or early-stage dementia (PWD/MCI) and their caregivers (CG). The pilot aimed to assess changes in quality of life, balance, mood, and functional brain networks in PWD/MCI and their CG. Participants were recruited as dyads (pairs) that included one PWD/MCI and one CG. Ten total dyads were enrolled in the pilot study with five dyads assigned to the usual care control group and five dyads participating in the dance intervention. The intervention arm met twice weekly for 60 min for 8 weeks. Attendance and quality of life assessed with the Quality of Life in Alzheimer's disease (QoL-AD) questionnaire were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included balance, mood and brain network connectivity assessed through graph theory analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Class attendance was 96% and qualitative feedback reflected participants felt socially connected to the group. Increases in quality of life and balance were observed, but not mood. Brain imaging analysis showed increases in multiple brain network characteristics, including global efficiency and modularity. Further investigation into the positive effects of this dance intervention on both imaging and non-imaging metrics will be carried out on the full clinical trial data. Results from the trial are expected in the summer of 2022.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".