The effect of exercise on behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia: towards a research agenda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are common and are core symptoms of the condition. They cause considerable distress to the person with dementia and their carers and predict early institutionalization and death. Historically, these symptoms have been managed with anxiolytic and antipsychotic medication. Although potentially effective, such medication has been used too widely and is associated with serious adverse side-effects and increased mortality. Consequently, there is a need to evaluate non-pharmacological therapies for behavioral and psychological symptoms in this population. One such therapy is physical activity, which has widespread health benefits. The aim of this review is to summarize the current findings of the efficacy of physical activity on BPSD. METHOD: Published articles were identified using electronic and manual searches. Rather than systematically aggregating data, this review adopted a rapid critical interpretive approach to synthesize the literature. RESULTS: Exercise appears to be beneficial in reducing some BPSD, especially depressed mood, agitation, and wandering, and may also improve night-time sleep. Evidence of the efficacy of exercise on improving other symptoms such as anxiety, apathy, and repetitive behaviors is currently weak or lacking. CONCLUSION: The beneficial effect of exercise type, its duration, and frequency is unclear although some studies suggest that walking for at least 30 minutes, several times a week, may enhance outcome. The methodological shortcomings of current work in this area are substantial. The research and clinical implications of current findings are discussed.
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 | 0.022 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".