MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415094934 · doi:10.53625/jirk.v5i5.11403

EFEKTIVITAS KOMBINASI SQUARE STEPPING EXERCISE DAN BRAIN GYM TERHADAP PENINGKATAN FUNGSI KOGNITIF PADA LANSIA DI UPT BUDHI DHARMA

2025· article· id· W4415094934 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kurnia Duwi Anggi Meilasari, Andry Ariyanto, Wika Yuniarwati

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Innovation Research and Knowledge · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSports and Physical Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive impairmentMotor activity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peningkatan usia harapan hidup di Indonesia telah menyebabkan bertambahnya jumlah lansia, yang turut meningkatkan risiko berbagai permasalahan Kesehatan, salah satunya adalah penurunan fungsi kognitif. Penurunan ini berdampak pada kualitas hidup lansia, termasuk menurunnya kemampuan dalam bersosialisasi serta peningkatan risiko demensia. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengevaluasi efektivitas kombinasi Square Stepping Exercise dan Brain Gym terhadap peningkatan fungsi kognitif pada lansia. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode experimental dengan one group pre-post test design. Sampel penelitian adalah lansia yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi dan ekslusi yaitu 20 orang lansia yang berusia 60 tahun keatas. Pengumpulan data menggunakan Montreal of Cognitive Asessment (MoCA-Ina). Penelitian ini dilakukan dilakukan 12 kali selama 12 hari di UPT Budhi Dharma Kota Yogyakarta. Hasil Uji statistik menunjukan kombinasi Square Stepping Exercise dan Brain Gym terhadap peningkatan fungsi kognitif lansia secara signifikan meningkatkan fungsi kognitif (p=0,000). Kesimpulan: kombinasi Square Stepping Exercise dan Brain Gym memberikan pengaruh positif terhadap peningkatan fungsi kognitif pada lansia dan dapat dijadikan program latihan fisioterapi di UPT Budhi Dharma kota Yogyakarta.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Innovation Research and KnowledgeSame topicSports and Physical Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207