Non-pharmacological Integrated Interventions in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: a Single Case Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Cognitive impairment can lead to a decline in cognitive function, depression, and loneliness, as well as decreased self-efficacy and quality of life in older adults. Objective To investigate the effects of non-pharmacological integrated interventions on cognitive function, depression, loneliness, self-efficacy, and quality of life in older adults with mild cognitive impairment. Methods Based on risk factors for cognitive impairment, a non-pharmacological integrated intervention program was developed in five dimensions of cognitive training, physical exercise, emotional management, social connection, and healthy lifestyle habits. Using a single-subject A-B-A experimental design, a 3-month intervention, which was conducted once a week for 60 minutes, was performed in three elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment from June to December 2021. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15), 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), and De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale (DJGLS) were administered to the 3 older adults at baseline, 3 months of the intervention, and 3 months after the intervention, to assess the scores of each scale from the 5 dimensions of cognitive function, self-efficacy, quality of life, depression, and loneliness, the changes in the scores were analyzed. A semi-structured interview was conducted 3 months after the intervention to evaluate the intervention effects in terms of cognitive function, quality of life, depression, self-efficacy, and loneliness dimensions. Results The 3 older adults included in the study were 74, 70, 73 years old, all married, living with their spouses and grandchildren. The three older adults had MoCA scores of 21, 22, and 24 at baseline, 28, 26, and 27 at 3 months of intervention, and 25, 19, and 23 at 3 months after intervention; GSES scores were 25, 30, and 27 at baseline, 29, 29, and 30 at 3 months of intervention, and 28, 31, and 28 at 3 months after intervention. SF-12 scores were 69, 32, and 51 at baseline, 81, 81, and 83 at 3 months of intervention, and 78, 38, and 59 at 3 months after intervention. The GDS-15 scale scores were 4, 8, and 2 at baseline, 2, 6, and 1 at 3 months of intervention, and 1, 8, and 4 at 3 months after intervention. The DJGLS scores were 8, 7, and 8 at baseline, 5, 5, and 4 at 3 months of intervention, and 5, 5, and 7 at 3 months after intervention. Semi-structured interview data indicated improvement in all five dimensions of cognitive function, quality of life, depression, loneliness, and self-efficacy of the subjects. Conclusion For older adults with mild cognitive impairment, it is of great significance to perform a non-pharmacological integrated intervention in terms of cognitive training, physical exercise, emotional management, social connection, and healthy lifestyle habits. The MoCA, SF-12, GDS-15, and DJGLS scores of older adults with mild cognitive impairment improved at 3 months of intervention, while the GSES scores improved at 3 months after intervention. GSES scores were not as effective after the intervention. All dimension scores showed a decreasing trend at 3 months after the 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".