MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117302278 · doi:10.1002/alz70858_103460

The impact of a multidomain lifestyle and empowerment program on wellbeing in people with MCI

2025· article· en· W7117302278 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kayci L. Vickers, Felicia C. Goldstein, Liselotte De Wit, Emily L. Giannotto, Jacquelyn T. Thelin, Amy D. Rodriguez

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentQuality of life (healthcare)Quality (philosophy)Well-beingAffect (linguistics)Healthy aging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) experience cognitive and functional declines that impact their ability to complete everyday activities. These changes negatively impact mood, leading to elevated depression and stress, and reduced feelings of self‐efficacy. Interventions that address psychosocial factors in MCI are critical to support quality of life for those living with cognitive disorders. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of a multidomain lifestyle program, the Cognitive Empowerment Program (CEP), on wellbeing in people with MCI. Method Participants were 95 people with MCI (27.7% female; mean age = 69.1 years, SD = 10.8) referred from Emory's Cognitive Neurology Clinic. Participants completed a 12‐month program comprised of physical, cognitive, and psychosocial interventions. Before and after program completion, participants completed a brief cognitive screener (Montreal Cognitive Assessment; MoCA), and functional status was rated by a knowledgeable informant (Functional Activities Questionnaire; FAQ). Questionnaires were administered to assess depression (Center for Epidemiological Studies‐ Depression; CESD), stress (Perceived Stress Scale; PSS), empowerment (MCI Empowerment Scale; unpublished), and measures of self‐efficacy and meaning and purpose from the NIH Toolbox Emotion Battery. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (see Table 1) and paired samples t‐tests. Result After completing the CEP program, participants reported significant improvements in stress, t(80) = 2.73, p = .01, feelings of empowerment, t[80] = ‐3.01, p < .01, self‐efficacy, t(82) = ‐2.11, p = .04, and meaning and purpose, t(83) = 2.54, p = .01. They did not demonstrate significant change in depression, t(81) = ‐.43; however, depression levels were low pre‐ and post‐program (CESD Pre = 11.7, SD = 4.1; CESD Post = 9.8, SD = 5.9). These findings occurred despite a small decline in cognitive status (MoCA Pre = 20.7, SD = 3.1; MoCA Post = 19.8, SD = 4.2), t(94) = 2.14, p = .04, and no change in functional status, t(89) = ‐.93, p = .36. Although change in MoCA score is statistically significant, it does not represent clinically meaningful decline. Conclusion Results of this study suggest a multidomain lifestyle and empowerment program positively impacts wellbeing and quality of life for those living with MCI. Further research is needed to understand individual factors that impact benefit from comprehensive programs of this nature and whether nonpharmacological lifestyle programs may provide synergistic benefit for pharmacological interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→