Impacto de um Programa de Estimulação Cognitivo na Função Cognitiva em Idosos Institucionalizados
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A estimulação cognitiva é fundamental para atrasar e/ou melhorar a função cognitiva dos idosos´ Este estudo teve como principais objetivos avaliar o impacto da aplicação de um Programa de Estimulação cognitiva na manutenção ou melhoria da função cognitiva como a orientação, memória, cálculo e linguagem, dos idosos e avaliar medidas complementares do impacto do programa de intervenção, nomeadamente na qualidade de vida, sintomas depressivos, nos oito domínios cognitivos, função executiva, capacidade viso-espacial, memória, atenção, concentração e memória de trabalho, linguagem e orientação. Este estudo é de natureza quase-experimental com recurso a uma metodologia de caráter quantitativo (Carmo & Ferreira, 2008). O programa foi realizado em sete idosos durante sete semanas e catorze sessões. Os mesmos responderam a um conjunto de instrumentos: Questionário sociodemográfico; Avaliação Cognitiva de Montreal/Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA); Instrumento de avaliação da qualidade de vida (IAQdV-8); Escala de Depressão Geriátrica (GDS-15) e o Teste de Declínio Cognitivo (6-CIT). Neste estudo participaram sete idosos, quatro homens e três mulheres, com idades compreendida entre os 68 e os 89 anos de idade (80.29±8.83 anos). Verificamos que o declínio cognitivo diminuiu (6_CIT), ou seja, houve uma melhoria da função cognitiva. De notar que houve cinco utentes que melhoraram, um piorou e outro manteve o mesmo valor de funcionamento cognitivo. A melhoria de alguns indicadores da função cognitiva está correlacionada com a sintomatologia depressiva e qualidade de vida. Dados os resultados há necessidade de melhorar o programa e aumentar o tamanho da amostra. / Cognitive stimulation is fundamental to delay or improve the cognitive function of elderly people. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the application of a cognitive Stimulation Program. And how it impacts in maintaining or improving the cognitive functions such as orientation, memory, calculus and language of elderly people; and assess additional measurements of the program’s intervention impact including quality of life, depressive symptoms and eight cognitive domains: executive function, visuospatial ability, memory, attention, concentration and working memory, language and orientation. This is an experience based study using a quantitative approach methodology (Carmo and Ferreira 2008). The program was conducted with seven elderly people in seven weeks and fourteen sessions. They answered to a set of instruments: Sociodemographic Survey, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Instrument for Assessing Quality of Life (IAQdV8), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and Cognitive Decline test (6-CIT). The participants of this study include seven people: four men and three women, aged between 68 and 89 years of age (80.29 ± 8.83 years). We confirmed that the cognitive decline has decreased (6_CIT), which means there was an improvement in the cognitive function. Note that there were five participants who improved, one worsened and another maintained the same cognitive functioning value. The improvement of some indicators of cognitive function is correlated with depressive symptoms and quality of life.
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".