Mild Dementia and the FIFA World Cup! A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The use of reminiscence therapy (RT) to prevent abnormal behaviors in patients with moderate dementia has been well‐established. It has many positive effects in the domains of quality of life, cognition, communication and mood. We are presenting a case where RT decreased abnormal behaviors. Method Case: An 83‐year‐old man with moderate dementia immigrated to the US. He lives with his family who provided care. No alcohol, tobacco use or illicit drug use was reported. The patient was evaluated by a geriatrician. The patient scored 12/30 in Montreal Cognitive Assessment indicating moderate cognitive impairment. Laboratory tests were unremarkable except Vitamin B12 level (slightly low 181). He was started on Donepezil and Vitamin B. Since his arrival to the US, the patient intermittently displayed abnormal behaviors including agitation, sleep disturbance and mood changes. Family members utilized his personal stories, hobbies and interests for behavioral interventions. A soccer‐focused RT method was applied. Several Youtube videos containing old matches during the FIFA World Cup were used whenever abnormal behavior was triggered. Result Family reports that the patient’s behaviors were relieved and interestingly improved using the soccer‐focused RT. Conclusion This case report highlights the importance of a thorough evaluation of patients with dementia to include their life story and interests. In this case, behavioral modalities including RT were tried with considerable benefits. Technology‐based tools present a fertile land to explore regarding RT use in patients with moderate dementia. References: Bob Woods et al. Reminiscence therapy for dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2018 Mar 1;3(3):CD001120. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001120.pub3 Laura Coll‐Planas et al. Developing Evidence for Football (Soccer) Reminiscence Interventions Within Long‐term Care: A Co‐operative Approach Applied in Scotland and Spain. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017 Apr 1;18(4):355‐360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2017.01.013 . Epub 2017 Mar 7. PMID: 28283380 Teuntje R Elfrink et al. Life story books for people with dementia: a systematic review. Int Psychogeriatr . 2018 Dec;30(12):1797‐1811. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610218000376 . Epub 2018 Jul 18. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30017005/ TikTok Video: #artist #painter #father #daughter #dementia #beauty #life #memories https://www.tiktok.com/@reyssongs/video/7171555440759754027 accessed 1/23/22
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".