P2–331: Preliminary findings from a 6‐month randomized controlled trial of combined dual‐task gait training and aerobic exercise in older adults with cognitive impairment but no dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Older adults with cognitive impairment but no dementia (CIND) have elevated risk for progression to Alzheimer's disease and related dementia. Evidence is insufficient to conclude that a specific cognitive or physical training program warrants prescription in older adults with CIND. Upon completion,84 older adults will be randomized to: i) dual-task gait training and aerobic exercise (DAE); or ii) single-task gait training and aerobic exercise (AE). Inclusion criteria: 60–90 years; Mini Mental State Examination score (MMSE) >24; Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (MoCA) <28 (goal: <26); preserved instrumental activities of daily living. Participants complete a 75-minute community-based exercise program that emphasizes AE, followed by 15-minutes of gait training alone, or coupled with cognitively challenging questions (DAE) (3 times/week; 6 months). For this interim analysis, we examined outcomes involving executive function [Trail Making Test Part B (TMT-B)], processing speed (TMT Part-A & Digit Symbol Substitution Test), and verbal learning and memory [Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT)]. Paired t-tests and analyses of covariance were used to examine mean change within groups [3 months (V1) - baseline (V0)] and differences between groups in mean change. At V0, participants [n = 19, mean age 73.7 (SD 6.8) y, 63% female] had mean MMSE and MoCA scores of 28.3 (SD 1.3) and 24.6 (SD 1.9), respectively. Within the DAE group, mean changes were in the hypothesized direction for all outcomes examined (i.e., showed improvement) and were statistically significant for 3 of 6 outcomes. Within the AE group, mean changes were also in the direction of improvement for all outcomes (except for the TMT-B) and were statistically significant for all AVLT outcomes. For most outcomes, greater improvements were seen in DAE compared to AE; however, no differences between groups reached statistical significance (see Table for all detailed results). Preliminary results indicate improvement in verbal learning and memory at 3-months for both groups. Additionally, the DAE group improved processing speed. Further accrual of study participants is required in order to determine whether the DAE group is superior to the AE group, in regard to improvement in cognitive functioning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".