MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307721736 · doi:10.1056/evidoa2200121

Computerized Games versus Crosswords Training in Mild Cognitive Impairment

2022· article· en· W4307721736 on OpenAlex
Davangere P. Devanand, Terry E. Goldberg, Min Qian, Sara N. Rushia, Joel R. Sneed, Howard Andrews, Izael Niño, Julia Phillips, Sierra T. Pence, Alexandra R. Linares, Caroline Hellegers, Andrew M. Michael, Nancy Kerner, Jeffrey R. Petrella, P. Murali Doraiswamy

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNEJM Evidence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthWake Forest UniversityEmory University
KeywordsMedicineDementiaConfidence intervalNeuropsychologyInternal medicineCognitive impairmentMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionPhysical therapyDiseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases the risk of dementia. The efficacy of cognitive training in patients with MCI is unclear. METHODS: In a two-site, single-blinded, 78-week trial, participants with MCI - stratified by age, severity (early/late MCI), and site - were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of intensive, home-based, computerized training with Web-based cognitive games or Web-based crossword puzzles, followed by six booster sessions. In mixed-model analyses, the primary outcome was change from baseline in the 11-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) score, a 70 point scale in which higher scores indicate greater cognitive impairment at 78 weeks, adjusted for baseline. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in neuropsychological composite score, University of California San Diego Performance-Based Skills Assessment (functional outcome) score, and Functional Activities Questionnaire (functional outcome) score at 78 weeks, adjusted for baseline. Changes in hippocampal volume and cortical thickness on magnetic resonance imaging were assessed. RESULTS: Among 107 participants (n=51 [games]; n=56 [crosswords]), ADAS-Cog score worsened slightly for games and improved for crosswords at week 78 (least squares [LS] means difference, -1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.83 to -0.06; P=0.04). From baseline to week 78, mean ADAS-Cog score worsened for games (9.53 to 9.93) and improved for crosswords (9.59 to 8.61). The late MCI subgroup showed similar results (LS means difference, -2.45; SE, 0.89; 95% CI, -4.21 to -0.70). Among secondary outcomes, the Functional Activities Questionnaire score worsened more with games than with crosswords at week 78 (LS means difference, -1.08; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.18). Other secondary outcomes showed no differences. Decreases in hippocampal volume and cortical thickness were greater for games than for crosswords (LS means difference, 34.07; SE, 17.12; 95% CI, 0.51 to 67.63 [hippocampal volume]; LS means difference, 0.02; SE, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.04 [cortical thickness]). CONCLUSIONS: Home-based computerized training with crosswords demonstrated superior efficacy to games for the primary outcome of baseline-adjusted change in ADAS-Cog score over 78 weeks. (Supported by the National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Aging; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03205709.).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.288 · 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