Effect of elastic band‐based high‐speed power training on cognitive function, physical performance and muscle strength in older women with mild cognitive impairment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The effectiveness of resistance training in improving cognitive function in older adults is well demonstrated. In particular, unconventional high-speed resistance training can improve muscle power development. In the present study, the effectiveness of 12 weeks of elastic band-based high-speed power training (HSPT) was examined. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned into a HSPT group (n = 14, age 75.0 ± 0.9 years), a low-speed strength training (LSST) group (n = 9, age 76.0 ± 1.3 years) and a control group (CON; n = 7, age 78.0 ± 1.0 years). A 1-h exercise program was provided twice a week for 12 weeks for the HSPT and LSST groups, and balance and tone exercises were carried out by the CON group. RESULTS: Significant increases in levels of cognitive function, physical function, and muscle strength were observed in both the HSPT and LSST groups. In cognitive function, significant improvements in the Mini-Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment were seen in both the HSPT and LSST groups compared with the CON group. In physical functions, Short Physical Performance Battery scores were increased significantly in the HSPT and LSST groups compared with the CON group. In the 12 weeks of elastic band-based training, the HSPT group showed greater improvements in older women with mild cognitive impairment than the LSST group, although both regimens were effective in improving cognitive function, physical function and muscle strength. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that elastic band-based HSPT, as compared with LSST, is more efficient in helping older women with mild cognitive impairment to improve cognitive function, physical performance and muscle strength. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 765-772.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it