MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405960826 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.0930

IMPACT OF GROUP-BASED DIGITAL GAMING INTERVENTION AMONG INDIVIDUALS LIVING WITH EARLY TO MODERATE DEMENTIA

2024· article· en· W4405960826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Megumi Inoue, Michelle D. Hand, Naoru Koizumi, Limei Chen, Emma Booker

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaIntervention (counseling)PsychologyGerontologyGroup (periodic table)MedicinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Slowing the progression of dementia and maintaining good behavioral and psychological symptoms are important aspects of life for individuals living with dementia and their caregivers. This study involved a group-based digital gaming system called Obie Technology as an interactive intervention for individuals living with dementia at a local adult day health center for 20 weeks, from mid-November 2023 to mid-April 2024. This gaming system promotes movement, stimulates cognitive activity, and encourages socialization. For example, colorful balloons float around the board or floor as clients try to hit as many as they can. A mixed methods approach with a pre-post design was employed to examine the effects of the intervention on cognitive function, mood, and behaviors in 24 individuals with early or moderate-level dementia. The average scores of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) at the baseline and midpoint (after 10 weeks) were 15.65 and 15.60, respectively, indicating no significant progression of dementia between these time periods. Participants’ depression level and neuropsychiatric symptoms presentation assessed by standardized instruments also showed no significant changes. The results from qualitative observations demonstrate that the group of people living with early-stage dementia in this study were more engaged and enjoyed the intervention compared to a group with moderate-stage dementia. They often comment that the intervention was fun, interesting, and enjoyable while actively engaging in the game with enhanced movement. In this presentation, we will present the findings based on the completed data, including the post-assessments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207