MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382678701 · doi:10.3233/jad-220619

Effects of the Multicomponent Cognitive Training Program BrainProtect in Cognitively Healthy Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4382678701 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julia Maria Falkenreck, Michelle Celine Kunkler, Anja Ophey, Hannah Weigert, Andrea Friese, Petra Jahr, Gereon Nelles, Elke Kalbe, Maria Cristina Polidori

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialCognitionCognitive trainingNeuropsychologyClinical psychologyPsychologyExecutive functionsVerbal fluency testEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapyMedicinePsychiatryPsychotherapistInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive integrity is a fundamental driver of health. The exact structure of strategies against cognitive impairment is still under debate. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term effects of a multicomponent cognitive training (BrainProtect) with those of general health counseling (GHC) on cognitive abilities and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in healthy adults in Germany. METHODS: In this parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT), 132 eligible cognitively healthy adults (age ≥50 years, Beck Depression Inventory ≤9/63; Montreal Cognitive Assessment ≥26/30) were randomized to either GHC (N = 72) or to intervention with BrainProtect (intervention group, IG; N = 60). IG participants received 8 weekly sessions of 90 min of the group-based BrainProtect program focusing on executive functions, concentration, learning, perception, and imagination, plus nutritional and physical exercise units. Before and after intervention, all participants underwent neuropsychological testing and HRQoL evaluation, blinded for pretest. RESULTS: No significant training effect was observed for the primary endpoint of global cognition as assessed by CERAD-Plus-z Total Score (p = 0.113; ηp2 = 0.023). Improvements in several cognitive subtests were shown in the IG (N = 53) compared to the GHC (N = 62) without adverse events. Differences reached significance for verbal fluency (p = 0.021), visual memory (p = 0.013), visuo-constructive functions (p = 0.034), and HRQoL (p = 0.009). Significance was lost after adjustment, though several changes were clinically relevant. CONCLUSION: BrainProtect did not significantly impact global cognition in this RCT. Nevertheless, the results of some outcomes indicate clinically meaningful changes, so that a strengthening of the cognitive performance by BrainProtect cannot be excluded. Further studies with larger sample size are needed to confirm these findings.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207