MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281743224 · doi:10.32598/ijpcp.28.1.2333.2

The Effectiveness of Cognitive Rehabilitation on Improving Cognitive Deficits in Patients With Chronic Schizophrenia Based on Cognitive Levels

2022· article· en· W4281743224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asal Fazeli, Behrooz Dolatshahi, Shima Shakiba

Bibliographic record

VenueIranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences
KeywordsCognitive remediation therapyCognitive rehabilitation therapyCognitionRehabilitationPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Stroop effectClinical psychologyExecutive functionsEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performancePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Cognitive deficits are a core feature of schizophrenia, which are directly associated with the functional and social outcomes of this disorder. Cognitive remediation therapy aims to improve the deficits and the following outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive remediation therapy on attention and working memory of two groups of patients with schizophrenia (low and moderate cognitive deficit). Methods A total of 30 hospitalized patients with schizophrenia were selected and divided into two different groups by clinical interviews and the scores obtained in the montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). The patients with low and moderate cognitive deficits were evaluated by the classic Stroop test, continuous performance test (CPT), and n-back test before and after the treatment. Both groups received cognitive remediation therapy prepared by Sholberg and Mateer (2001). This rehabilitation program in treating patients with schizophrenia focuses on the cognitive abilities of memory and its elements, attention, and dimensions of attention and executive function. The above rehabilitation program has been prepared for individual or group implementation, and its purpose is to repair cognitive deficits and skills through practice and training. The number of sessions of this program includes 16, and the instructions for each session are very specific. Each session takes an average of 30 to 45 minutes. Results The results showed that cognitive rehabilitation in both groups at the post-test level (P≤0.05) improved cognitive performance significantly in the areas of sustained attention, selective attention, and working memory. Comparing the performance between the two groups, only a significant difference (P≤0.05) was observed between the two groups in the field of sustained attention. Conclusion Based on the findings, cognitive rehabilitation treatment improves patients’ performance in selective attention, sustained attention, and working memory. In addition, in terms of the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation between the two groups with low and moderate cognitive deficits, the findings indicate more progress in the group with more severe cognitive deficits in the field of sustained attention and no difference in selective attention performance and working memory.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical PsychologySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207