Enhancing cognition, motivation, and behavioral performance in individuals with severe mental illness through an intervention incorporating tabletop games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of tabletop games on cognition, motivation and behavioral performance for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). A total of 44 eligible participants were recruited in a single psychiatric medical institute and were assigned to either the experimental group (EG, n = 21) or a control group (CG, n = 23). The outcome measures were cognition measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Color Trails Test (CTT), behavioral performance measured by Work Behavior Inventory (WBI), and motivation measured by Volitional Questionnaire. After eight weeks of tabletop game intervention, three times a week for 60 min each time, the EG exhibited significant and/or medium trends of improvement in all outcome measures. The CG showed significant and medium trend of improvement in delayed recall of MoCA and time to finish Color Trails Test 1, and regression in orientation of MoCA and work quality in WBI. Tabletop games improve cognition, motivation and behavioral performance in individuals with SMI. Further investigation is required to determine the long-term effects of tabletop games intervention.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".