A Six-Month Cognitive-Motor and Aerobic Exercise Program Improves Executive Function in Persons with an Objective Cognitive Impairment: A Pilot Investigation Using the Antisaccade Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons with an objective cognitive impairment (OCI) are at increased risk for progression to Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. The present pilot project sought to examine whether participation in a long-term exercise program involving cognitive-motor (CM) dual-task gait training and aerobic exercise training improves executive function in persons with an OCI. To accomplish our objective, individuals with an OCI (n = 12) as determined by a Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score of less than 26 and older adults (n = 11) deemed to be cognitively healthy (i.e., control group: MoCA score ≥26) completed a six-month moderate-to-high intensity (65-85% maximum heart rate) treadmill-based CM and aerobic exercise training program wherein pre- and post-intervention executive control was examined via the antisaccade task. Notably, antisaccades require a goal-directed eye-movement mirror-symmetrical to a target and represent an ideal tool for the study of executive deficits because of its hands- and language-free nature. As well, the cortical networks mediating antisaccades represent regions associated with neuropathology in cognitive decline and dementia (e.g., dorsolateral prefrontal cortex). Results showed that antisaccade reaction times for the OCI group reliably decreased by 30 ms from pre- to post-intervention, whereas the control group did not produce a reliable pre- to post-intervention change in reaction time (i.e., 6 ms). Thus, we propose that in persons with OCI long-term CM and aerobic training improves the efficiency and effectiveness of the executive mechanisms mediating high-level oculomotor control.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".