Benefits of Multimodal Exercise Intervention for Postural Control and Frontal Cognitive Functions in Individuals with Alzheimer's Disease: A Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To verify the effects of a systematized multimodal exercise intervention program on frontal cognitive function, postural control, and functional capacity components of individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD). DESIGN: Nonrandomized controlled trial with pre- and posttraining tests in a training group and a control group. SETTING: Kinesiotherapy program for seniors with AD, São Paulo State University. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of older adults with AD (n = 30) were assigned to a training (n = 14; aged 78.6 ± 7.1) and a control (n = 16; aged 77.0 ± 6.3) group. INTERVENTION: The intervention program was structured with the aim of simultaneously promoting better balance and frontal cognitive capacity. The participants attended a 1-hour session three times a week for 16 weeks, whereas the control group did not participate in any activity during the same period. MEASUREMENTS: Frontal cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, the Clock Drawing Test, the Frontal Assessment Battery, and the Symbol Search Subtest. Postural control (center of pressure area) was analyzed under four dual-task conditions. Functional capacity components were analyzed using the Timed Up and Go Test, the 30-second sit-to-stand test, the sit-and-reach test, and the Berg Functional Balance Scale. RESULTS: Intervention group participants showed a significant increase in frontal cognitive function (P < .001, partial η(2) = 0.838), with less body sway (P = .04, partial η(2) = 0.04) during the dual tasks, and greater functional capacity (P = .001, partial η(2) = 0.676) after the 16-week period. CONCLUSION: Intervention participants performed better on dual-task activities and had better postural balance and greater functional capacity than controls.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".