MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312205210 · doi:10.55131/jphd/2023/210115

Effects of integrated interventions on the brain’s ability of elderly people with mild cognitive impairment

2022· article· en· W4312205210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patcharaporn Wongarsa, Yuttachai Chaiyasit, Jutharat Saowaphan, Narumol Muthawan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health and Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitive impairmentPsychologyCognitionTest (biology)Elderly peopleGerontologyPhysical therapyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the quasi-experimental study was to examine the effects of integrated interventions on the brain’s ability of elderly people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Six weeks of integrated interventions consisted of promoting physical activities, brain training, and group activities, which were developed for the experimental group. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Thai Version (MoCA-Thai Version) was used for evaluating the brain’s ability of the elderly people. The data were analyzed by using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, Chi-square, dependent t-test, and independent t-test. The study's findings showed that the experimental group's average MoCA-Thai Version test score increased after finishing the program (p < 0.01). Additionally, the experimental group's average MoCA-Thai Version test score was significantly (p < 0.01) higher than the control group. Therefore, elderly people with MCI should be encouraged to engage in physical activities, brain training, and group activities through the integrated program for promoting the brain’s ability.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Health and DevelopmentSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207