EFFECTS OF A NEUROMUSCULAR TRAINING PROGRAM ON BALANCE IN OLDER ADULTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies in the area of balance have shown that the hip girdle musculature is involved in one of the main strategies employed in regaining balance. It has also been shown that 12 week strength training programs undertaken at any age can show modest improvements in strength and profound effects in functional independence. Purpose: To examine the relationship between neuromuscular recruitment in the muscles associated with the hip girdle and functional balance in a 12 week training program with healthy older adults. Methods: Forty-four women aged 70 and older volunteered into the control (n1 = 22, Mean Age = 75.91 ± 3.66) or training group (n2 = 22, Mean Age = 76.05 ± 4.78). Subjects were tested on 2 functional lower body tests; a Timed Two-Legged Squat (TTLS) and Timed Chair Stand (TCS). Functional balance was assessed using the Kinesthetic Ability Trainer (KAT). The KAT uses an inflatable air bladder to alter the stability of the platform. Platform stability was timed under 3 conditions (psi levels: 1.0, 2.5, 4.0) with eyes open and closed. Subjects in the training group were allotted to training workouts consisting of 1 hour stretching and strengthening programs 3x/wk for 12 weeks. Subjects in the comparison group were asked to maintain their daily routines and not participate in additional activities. A subjective questionnaire on general well-being was administered to both groups after the completion of the study. Results: Currently with 9 of 22 completed 12 weeks of training (n1 = 9, n2 = 9), a 2×2 ANOVA with repeated measures on one factor demonstrated a statistical significant effect in the TTLS (p = 0.01), and TCS (p < 0.01). As well, as expected, the TTLS was negatively correlated with the TCS. The results of the questionnaire suggest that undertaking a strength-training program can improve one's quality of life. However, no significant difference was noted under any of the balance conditions. Conclusion: These results suggest that resistance training improves strength, functional independence and quality of life. Further research, with larger sample sizes, is warranted to assess the effects on balance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".