MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321022113 · doi:10.34263/jsotad.2022.16.2.127

A Study on Influencing Factors Between Benefit Type, Service Delivery System and Need according to Long-term Care Insurance Grade

2022· article· en· W4321022113 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSociety of Occupational Therapy for the Aged and Dementia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Perception and Purchasing Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionDementiaWoodworkingMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMedicineGerontologyCognitive impairmentCarpentryPhysical therapyPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineEngineeringDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

목적: 본 연구는 비약물적 중재의 하나로써 목공프로그램의 효과성을 검증하고, 경도인지장애노인과 경증치매노인의 인지기능에 미치는 영향을 알아보고자 하였다. 연구방법: 서울시 Y 치매센터를 이용하는 경도인지장애노인 32명, 경증치매노인 28명을 실험군, 통제군으로모집하여, 실험군은 5주간 주 2회씩 약 120분 동안 목공프로그램에 참여하였다. 효과성 검증을 위해 연구대상자는 프로그램 사전-사후에 MoCA-K를 통해 인지기능을 조사하였다. 연구결과: 목공프로그램에 참여한 실험군과 통제군의 집단간 차이 분석을 실시한 결과, 경증치매 실험군의인지기능 평균점수가 사전보다 유의미하게 증가하였으며(p<.05), 사전-사후 인지기능의 평균 변화를살펴보았을 때, 경증치매 실험군의 인지기능 점수가 유의미하게 향상된 것으로 나타났다(p<.05). 결론: 본 연구는 노인의 목공프로그램 참여에 대한 인지기능 향상의 효과성을 검증하였으며, 경도인지장애와 경증치매노인으로 집단을 세분화하여 치매 전 단계와 초기 단계 노인의 목공프로그램 참여에대한 인지기능의 변화 차이를 검증하여 치매노인의 인지기능을 향상시키기 위한 비약물적 중재로서 목공프로그램의 발전 방향을 제시한다는 함의를 가진다.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.227 · 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