Benefits of Physical Exercise Training on Cognition and Quality of Life in Frail Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Frailty is a state of vulnerability associated with increased risks of fall, hospitalization, cognitive deficits, and psychological distress. Studies with healthy senior suggest that physical exercise can help improve cognition and quality of life. Whether frail older adults can show such benefits remains to be documented. METHOD: A total of 83 participants aged 61-89 years were assigned to an exercise-training group (3 times a week for 12 weeks) or a control group (waiting list). Frailty was determined by a complete geriatric examination using specific criteria. Pre- and post-test measures assessed physical capacity, cognitive performance, and quality of life. RESULTS: Compared with controls, the intervention group showed significant improvement in physical capacity (functional capacities and physical endurance), cognitive performance (executive functions, processing speed, and working memory), and quality of life (global quality of life, leisure activities, physical capacity, social/family relationships, and physical health). Benefits were overall equivalent between frail and nonfrail participants. DISCUSSION: Physical exercise training leads to improved cognitive functioning and psychological well-being in frail older adults.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".