Music-induced cognitive change and whole-brain network flexibility: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive impairment that exceeds age-related cognitive decline is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. As the older adult population is notably increasing every year, significant efforts are being made to preserve cognitive function in older adulthood. Non-pharmaceutical approaches such as music interventions have noticeable benefits for cognition. Music engagement utilizes multiple brain regions dually involved in higher cognitive functions. Yet the neurobiology of music-induced cognitive change remains understudied. Complex human behavior and cognition likely depend on continuous communication across brain regions rather than localized activity in one region. Given that music creativity engages a wide range of mental processes, whole-brain network indices quantifying the brain's tendency to create functional communities (modularity) and then dynamically reorganize these communities (flexibility) may be relevant for assessing music-related cognitive change. Using a semi-randomized clinical trial design (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04137913), we examined whether (1) music creativity altered whole-brain network indices (modularity, flexibility) and (2) whether music-related effects on cognition depended on whole-brain network indices. Methods: = 27) and completed resting-state fMRI scans and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment at baseline and follow-up (post-intervention). Results: The music creativity intervention did not alter network flexibility or modularity over time. However, the relationship between group assignment and change in global cognitive function depended on baseline flexibility: music creativity improved global cognition more than the control condition, only among individuals who had higher than average network flexibility. Discussion: Findings suggest that having a dynamic brain network, which has previously been linked to better executive functioning performance, may be necessary for music-related benefits on cognition. This pilot study is innovative as it is among the first to identify possible neural mechanisms underlying why music creativity interventions confer a more significant cognitive benefit for some older adults than others.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".