The effects of aerobic exercise and transcranial direct current stimulation on cognitive function in older adults with and without cognitive impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Aerobic exercise (AE) may slow age-related cognitive decline. However, such cognition-sparing effects are not uniform across cognitive domains and studies. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a form of non-invasive brain stimulation and is also emerging as a potential alternative to pharmaceutical therapies. Like AE, the effectiveness of tDCS is also inconsistent for reducing cognitive impairment in ageing. The unexplored possibility exists that pairing AE and tDCS could produce synergistic effects and reciprocally augment cognition-improving effects in older individuals with and without cognitive impairments. Previous research found such synergistic effects on cognition when cognitive training is paired with tDCS in older individuals with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia. AIM: The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to explore if pairing AE with tDCS could augment singular effects of AE and tDCS on global cognition (GC), working memory (WM) and executive function (EF) in older individuals with or without MCI and dementia. METHODS: Using a PRISMA-based systematic review, we compiled studies that examined the effects of AE alone, tDCS alone, and AE and tDCS combined on cognitive function in older individuals with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia. Using a PICOS approach, we systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science searches up to December 2021, we focused on 'MoCA', 'MMSE', 'Mini-Cog' (measures) and 'cognition', 'cognitive function', 'cognitive', 'cognitive performance', 'executive function', 'executive process', 'attention', 'memory', 'memory performance' (outcome terms). We included only randomized controlled trials (RTC) in humans if available in English full text over the past 20 years, with participants' age over 60. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies (RTC) by the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. RESULTS: Overall, 68 studies were included in the meta-analyses. AE (ES = 0.56 [95% CI: 0.28-0.83], p = 0.01) and tDCS (ES = 0.69 [95% CI: 0.12-1.26], p = 0.02) improved GC in all three groups of older adults combined (healthy, MCI, demented). In healthy population, AE improved GC (ES = 0.46 [95% CI: 0.22-0.69], p = 0.01) and EF (ES = 0.27 [95% CI: 0.05-0.49], p = 0.02). AE improved GC in older adults with MCI (ES = 0.76 [95% CI: 0.21-1.32], p = 0.01). tDCS improved GC (ES = 0.69 [90% CI: 0.12-1.26], p = 0.02), all three cognitive function (GC, WM and EF) combined in older adults with dementia (ES = 1.12 [95% CI: 0.04-2.19], p = 0.04) and improved cognitive function in older adults overall (ES = 0.69 [95% CI: 0.20-1,18], p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our systematic review with meta-analysis provided evidence that beyond the cardiovascular and fitness benefits of AE, pairing AE with tDCS may have the potential to slow symptom progression of cognitive decline in MCI and dementia. Future studies will examine the hypothesis of this present review that a potentiating effect would incrementally improve cognition with increasing severity of cognitive impairment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle