MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270042706 · doi:10.1186/s13063-015-1032-3

Effects of exercise and horticultural intervention on the brain and mental health in older adults with depressive symptoms and memory problems: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial [UMIN000018547]

2015· article· en· W2270042706 on OpenAlexaff
Hyuma Makizako, Kota Tsutsumimoto, Takehiko Doi, Ryo Hotta, Sho Nakakubo, Teresa Liu‐Ambrose, Hiroyuki Shimada

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNational Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMedicineDementiaPsychological interventionMental healthPhysical therapyAerobic exerciseDepression (economics)CognitionGeriatric Depression ScaleIntervention (counseling)Physical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyPsychiatryDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms and memory problems are significant risk factors for dementia. Exercise can reduce depressive symptoms and improve cognitive function in older people. In addition, the benefits of horticultural activity on physical and mental well-being have been demonstrated in people with dementia. Although evidence of such non-pharmacological interventions is mounting, no studies have examined whether physical exercise and horticultural activity exert a positive impact on brain and mental health (e.g., depressive symptoms) in non-demented older adults at high risk of cognitive impairment and depression. Therefore, we propose a randomized controlled trial to assess the efficacy and efficiency of physical exercise and horticultural activity in improving brain and mental health in community-dwelling older adults with memory problems and depressive symptoms. METHODS/DESIGN: The 20-week randomized controlled trial will include 90 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or older with memory problems and depressive symptoms. Participants will be randomized to one of three experiments: exercise, horticultural activity, or educational control group, using a 1:1:1 allocation ratio. The combined exercise program and horticultural activity program will consist of 20 weekly 90-minute sessions. Participants in the exercise group will practice aerobic exercise, muscle strength training, postural balance retraining, and dual-task training. The horticultural activity program will include crop-related activities, such as field cultivation, growing, and harvesting. Participants in the educational control group will attend two 90-minute educational classes during the 6-month trial period. Depressive symptoms and memory performance will be measured by the Geriatric Depression Scale-15, and the Logical Memory subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised will be used to measure depressive symptoms and memory performance as primary outcomes, at baseline (prior to randomization), immediately following intervention (6 months from baseline), and 6 months after intervention. Hippocampal volume will be measured at baseline and immediately after intervention, using magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary outcomes will comprise cognitive function, including language, attention/executive performance, and processing speed; brain-derived neurotrophic-factor serum levels; and health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: This intervention study will determine the clinical importance and efficacy of physical exercise and horticultural activity as non-pharmacological interventions in community-dwelling older adults at high risk of poor brain and mental health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000018547 ; registered 7 August 2015.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized trialhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207