Effectiveness of Task Specific Cognitive Rehabilitation Protocol on Higher Mental Function Impairments in Individuals with Traumatic Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness of task-specific cognitive rehabilitation (TSCR) in improving higher mental function impairments in individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Setting: Community Participants: 28 participants with moderate to severe TBI between 18 to 55 years old with Rancho Los Amigos (RLA) cognitive level of 5 and above. Out of 28 participants, 2 participants declined to continue in the study. Design: Randomized Clinical Trial. Participants were grouped into interventional and control groups. The intervention group received task-specific cognitive rehabilitation. The intervention consisted of a 4-week program focused on activities that enhance cognitive domains such as attention, memory, executive function, and problem-solving skills. Pre- and post- intervention assessments were conducted. Key measures: Standardized neuropsychological tests and functional outcome measures were the Mini-Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Cog Scale. Results: The intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in higher mental functions than the control group. Specific gains were observed in the Mini-Mental Status Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Cog scale with p < 0.01. Functional outcomes also showed marked enhancement in the intervention group, with significant improvements in daily living activities and overall quality of life (p < 0.05). No side effects were reported, indicating the safety of the task-specific cognitive rehabilitation program. Conclusion: Task-specific cognitive rehabilitation is an effective intervention for improving higher mental function impairments in individuals with TBI. These findings support the integration of task-specific strategies in cognitive rehabilitation programs to e nhance cognitive and functional recovery post-TBI.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".