MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386858059 · doi:10.1097/jnr.0000000000000576

Exploring the Effectiveness of Group Cognitive Stimulation Training in People With Schizophrenia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4386858059 on OpenAlex
Chia‐Chi Chang, Hua-Shan WU, Chen‐Jee Hong, Chieh‐Yu Liu, Chi-Wen CHEN, Chiu‐Yueh Yang

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

VenueJournal of Nursing Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentRandomized controlled trialWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleCognitionSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyMoodGlobal Assessment of FunctioningPhysical therapyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryCognitive impairmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia is a chronic degenerative brain disease. Cognitive impairment, the core symptom of this disease, affects the mood and social functioning of patients severely. Nonpharmacological therapies that both improve cognitive function and are suitable for patients with schizophrenia remain underdeveloped. PURPOSE: This article was designed to explore the effects of group cognitive stimulation training (GCST) on cognitive function and social function in people with schizophrenia. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted. The 76 participants were allocated into either the experimental or control group using blocked randomization. The participants were all patients with chronic schizophrenia recruited from seven rehabilitation units in northern Taiwan who were 20-65 years old and scored 10-25 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Taiwan Version. The experimental group received the 60-minute GCST twice a week for 7 weeks, whereas the control group received standard treatment. All outcome indicators were analyzed at baseline and after intervention using generalized estimating equations. The primary outcome indicators included cognitive function assessed using the Taiwan version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, working memory assessed using the Wechsler Memory Scale-Third Edition, and executive function assessed using the Taiwanese version of the Frontal Assessment Battery. The secondary outcome indicator was social function assessed using the Social Function Scale-Taiwan short version. RESULTS: Generalized estimating equation modeling revealed the experimental group exhibited significant improvement in Montreal Cognitive Assessment total score ( B = 1.33, SE = 0.65, p = .040) and Social Function Scale-Taiwan short version ( B = 9.55, SE = 2.38, p < .001) after adjusting for nine covariates. No significant differences between the two groups in terms of working memory ( B = 4.79, SE = 2.66, p = .071) or executive function ( B = 0.53, SE = 0.63, p = .399) were found. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results indicate that GCST positively impacts overall cognitive and social functions but not higher-order cognitive function (working memory and executive function). In clinical settings, GCST may be applied to improve cognitive function in people with schizophrenia. The findings of this study may inform the practice of mental health nurses to improve cognitive function in patients in clinical care.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.260 · 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