scholarly journals Randomized controlled trial of passive and Motivative exercise of brain function using NIRS and MRI

BIOPHILIA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Toshiyuki Tanaka ◽  
Shigeo TAKIZAWA
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Assessment of reward-related brain function after a single-dose of oxytocin in autism: a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annalina V. Mayer ◽  
Katrin Preckel ◽  
Kristin Ihle ◽  
Fabian A. Piecha ◽  
Klaus Junghanns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Single Dose ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Effects of the FITKids Randomized Controlled Trial on Executive Control and Brain Function

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 134 (4) ◽  
pp. e1063-e1071 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. H. Hillman ◽  
M. B. Pontifex ◽  
D. M. Castelli ◽  
N. A. Khan ◽  
L. B. Raine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Aerobic exercise alters brain function and structure in Parkinson's disease a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.E. Johansson ◽  
I.G.M. Cameron ◽  
N.M. van der Kolk ◽  
N.M. De Vries ◽  
E. Klimars ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Aerobic Exercise ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Lutein and Zeaxanthin Influence Brain Function in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cutter A. Lindbergh ◽  
Lisa M. Renzi-Hammond ◽  
Billy R. Hammond ◽  
Douglas P. Terry ◽  
Catherine M. Mewborn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Bold Signal ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Verbal Learning Task

AbstractObjectives:The present study constitutes the first randomized controlled trial to investigate the relation of lutein (L) and zeaxanthin (Z) to brain function using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). It was hypothesized that L and Z supplementation in older adults would enhance neural efficiency (i.e., reduce activation) and cognitive performance on a verbal learning task relative to placebo.Methods:A total of 44 community-dwelling older adults (mean age=72 years) were randomly assigned to receive either placebo or L+Z supplementation (12 mg/daily) for 1 year. Neurocognitive performance was assessed at baseline and post-intervention on an fMRI-adapted task involving learning and recalling word pairs. Imaging contrasts of blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signal were created by subtracting active control trials from learning and recall trials. A flexible factorial model was employed to investigate the expected group (placebovs. supplement) by time (baselinevs. post-intervention) interaction in pre-specified regions-of-interest.Results:L and Z appeared to buffer cognitive decline on the verbal learning task (Cohen’sd=.84). Significant interactions during learning were observed in left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex (p< .05, family-wise-error corrected). However, these effects were in the direction of increased rather than decreased BOLD signal. Although the omnibus interaction was not significant during recall, within-group contrasts revealed significant increases in left prefrontal activation in the supplement group only.Conclusions:L and Z supplementation appears to benefit neurocognitive function by enhancing cerebral perfusion, even if consumed for a discrete period of time in late life. (JINS, 2018,24, 77–90)

Treatment Fidelity Procedures for an Aphasia Intervention Within a Randomized Controlled Trial: Design, Feasibility, and Results

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1S) ◽  
pp. 412-424
Author(s):  
Elissa L. Conlon ◽  
Emily J. Braun ◽  
Edna M. Babbitt ◽  
Leora R. Cherney
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Treatment Fidelity ◽  
Protocol Adherence ◽  
Study Condition ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Aphasia Therapy ◽  
Percent Accuracy ◽  
Over Time

Purpose This study reports on the treatment fidelity procedures implemented during a 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing intensive and distributed comprehensive aphasia therapy. Specifically, the results of 1 treatment, verb network strengthening treatment (VNeST), are examined. Method Eight participants were recruited for each of 7 consecutive cohorts for a total of 56 participants. Participants completed 60 hr of aphasia therapy, including 15 hr of VNeST. Two experienced speech-language pathologists delivered the treatment. To promote treatment fidelity, the study team developed a detailed manual of procedures and fidelity checklists, completed role plays to standardize treatment administration, and video-recorded all treatment sessions for review. To assess protocol adherence during treatment delivery, trained research assistants not involved in the treatment reviewed video recordings of a subset of randomly selected VNeST treatment sessions and completed the fidelity checklists. This process was completed for 32 participants representing 2 early cohorts and 2 later cohorts, which allowed for measurement of protocol adherence over time. Percent accuracy of protocol adherence was calculated across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition (intensive vs. distributed therapy). Results The fidelity procedures were sufficient to promote and verify a high level of adherence to the treatment protocol across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition. Conclusion Treatment fidelity strategies and monitoring are feasible when incorporated into the study design. Treatment fidelity monitoring should be completed at regular intervals during the course of a study to ensure that high levels of protocol adherence are maintained over time and across conditions.

Phonomotor Versus Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Anomia in 58 Persons With Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 4464-4482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane L. Kendall ◽  
Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽  
Wesley Allen ◽  
Janaki Torrence ◽  
Stephen E. Nadeau
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Response Latency ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Semantic Feature ◽  
Feature Analysis ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Confrontation Naming ◽  
Semantic Feature Analysis

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document