Improving Cognitive Performance with Board Activities in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive function decline is one of the problems that is often experienced as we age, and this has an impact on activities of daily living (ADL), social participation, employment, psychological conditions, and independence of pre-elderly and elderly. To maintain cognitive abilities, interventions in the form of cognitive activities are needed. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the Monopoli Modified Board Game (Indonesian Version) on the cognitive abilities of pre-elderly and elderly. The method used was pre-experimental one-group pretest and posttest, with 28 subjects from the elderly community RW 8, Kemiri, Kebakkramat, Karanganyar. Data collection was carried out using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Indonesian Version (MoCa-Ina) instrument, and the modified monopoly game was conducted in 8 sessions for eight weeks. The results showed that there was a significant effect of the Monopoly Modified Board Game on the cognitive abilities of pre-elderly and elderly, with a paired t-test value of Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.001, which means the p-value <0.05. The mean difference of 2.25 indicates an increase in cognitive abilities after the intervention. The majority of research subjects were female, with a pre-elderly age category of 53.5%, most were not working (60.7%), and had the last education at a low level (75%). The implication of this study shows that the Monopoli Modified Board Game (Indonesian Version) can be an effective alternative intervention in improving cognitive abilities in pre-elderly and elderly, so that it can help them maintain independence and a better quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".