Effect of Multimodal Intervention (computer based cognitive training, diet and exercise) in comparison to health awareness among older adults with Subjective Cognitive Impairment (MISCI-Trial)—A Pilot Randomized Control Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study was aimed to investigate the effect of multimodal intervention on the cognitive functions of older adults with subjective cognitive impairment (SCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty subjects were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive either computer based cognitive therapy (CBCT) or CBCT+Mediterranean equivalent diet (MED) or CBCT+MED+ Exercise regime and the control group. The intervention group received supervised CBCT twice a week to have 40 sessions, each of 40 minutes duration, and/ or supervised aerobic and resistive exercise twice a week for 24 weeks and or MED at home under the supervision of a dietician. The control group was provided with health awareness instructions for brain stimulating activities such as sudoku, mental maths, and learning music and new skills. RESULTS: Cognitive functions which was the primary outcome measure were assessed using the Post Graduate Institute Memory Scale (PGI-MS), and Stroop Colour and Word Test at baseline and after 6 months intervention period. As assessed by the PGI-MS, there was significant improvement in domains such as mental balance, attention and concentration, delayed recall, immediate recall, verbal retention of dissimilar pairs, Visual retention, and total score both in the unimodal and multimodal intervention groups. However, the improvement was observed to be the highest in the multimodal intervention group as compared to unimodal group. All the participants completed the trial. CONCLUSION: This pilot randomized control trial indicated that multimodal intervention could be an effective non-pharmacological intervention in individuals with SCI for improving their cognitive functions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".