MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W70378005 · doi:10.5353/th_b5091587

Association of physical activity with cognitive function, behavioral symptoms, and caregiver's burden in Chinese dementia patients

2013· dissertation· en· W70378005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jing Xiao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaAssociation (psychology)GerontologyCognitionPsychologyMedicinePhysical activityClinical psychologyPsychiatryPhysical therapyPsychotherapistDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: 
\nDementia refers to impairments of memory and other cognitive functions with consequent decline in activities of daily living. Besides cognitive symptoms, demented patients can also exhibit behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), which are stressors leading to family caregivers’ burden. Physical activity may give rise to benefits in cognitive function, and may reduce behavioral symptoms and caregivers’ burden. However, most previous studies were reported from Caucasian populations. There was no previous report on the relationship of physical activity in dementia patients on family caregiver’s burden in Hong Kong Chinese older adults.
\n
\nObjectives: 
\nThe objective of this study was to investigate the associations of physical activity level with cognitive function, behavioral and psychological symptoms and caregivers’ burden in dementia patients in Hong Kong Chinese population.
\n
\nMethod: 
\nThis was a cross-sectional study. 201 dementia patients who were screened by the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited from the Geriatric Clinic in Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, from May 2013 to August 2013. Social demographic information and comorbid diseases information were collected from all subjects. Subjects were then assessed with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL), Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE), as well as Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Subjects’ family caregivers were assessed with Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI).
\n
\nMain outcome measures: 
\nThe outcome measures for the cognitive function were the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The outcome measures for BPSD and caregiver’s burden were the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) and Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI), respectively.
\n
\nResults: 
\nWe screened a total of 239 subjects in the Geriatric Clinic of Queen Mary Hospital. 201 subjects (70 males and 131 females) were recruited. 38 participants were excluded according to the exclusion criteria. The score means (SD) of the recruited were: PASE =27.5 (23.9); ADCS-ADL=45.3 (14.5); MMSE=17.3 (5.4); MoCA=9.9 (5.3); NPI=9.5 (9.7); ZBI=33.3 (14.8). In bivariate analysis, the PASE score was significantly associated with the MMSE score (rho=0.259, p<0.001), the MoCA score (rho=0.311, p<0.001), the NPI score (rho=-0.225, p=0.001), and the ZBI score (rho=-0.253, p<0.001). In multivariate analyses, using general linear models, the PASE score was independently associated with the MMSE (F=5.57, p=0.001) and MoCA (F=7.10, p<0.001) scores, after adjusting for significant confounders in bivariate analyses (i.e. age, education and gender). The PASE was also independently associated with the NPI score (F=2.89, p=0.037). The PASE score was not an independent predictor of the ZBI score. However, the subjects’ ADCS-ADL score (F=15.65, p<0.001), and the NPI score (F=8.55, p=0.004) were independent predictors of the caregiver’s ZBI score.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.388 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207