[O3–01–03]: MULTIPLE‐MODALITY EXERCISE AND MIND‐MOTOR TRAINING TO IMPROVE COGNITION IN OLDER ADULTS: RESULTS FROM THE M4 STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This 24-week randomized controlled trial with a 28-week no-contact follow-up investigated the effects of multiple-modality exercise with or without the addition of a novel form of mind-motor training (i.e., Square-Stepping Exercise) on cognition in community-dwelling older adults with subjective cognitive complaints. Participants [n=127, 67.5 (7.3) yr, 71% females] were randomized to either the M4 (n=63) or M2 (n=64) groups. Both groups received multiple-modality exercise intervention (i.e., 45 min of aerobic exercise and resistance training); however, the M4 group underwent additional 15 minutes of mind-motor training, whereas the M2 group received 15 minutes of balance, range of motion and breathing exercises. In total, both groups exercised 60 min/day, 3 days/week for 24-weeks. Participants were assessed in global cognitive functioning (GCF), concentration, reasoning, planning and memory using the computer-based Cambridge Brain Sciences (CBS) cognitive battery. Additionally, frequency and duration of recreational physical activities (PA) were collected using the Phone-FITT questionnaire. Assessments were conducted at baseline, intervention endpoint (24-weeks) and study endpoint (52-weeks). There were no statistically significant differences between groups at 24-weeks; however, the M4 group showed a trend to greater improvement in GCF (p=.071) and memory (p=.067). Improvements within groups from baseline were seen at 24-weeks in GCF (M2: p=.001; M4: p<.001), concentration (M2: p=.044; M4: p=.001), reasoning (M2: p=.018; M4: p=.005), planning (M4 only: p=.005) and memory (M4 only: p=.001). At 52-weeks, the M4 group demonstrated greater performance in GCF (p=0.022) and memory (p=.026) compared to the M2 group. Differences within groups from baseline remained significant in GCF (M2: p=.001; M4: p<.001), concentration (both groups: p<.001), reasoning (M2: p=.014; M4: p=.002), planning (M4 only: p<.001), and memory (M4 only: p<.001). Also, the M4 group increased PA at 52-weeks (p=.015) compared to baseline, with no differences between groups. 24 weeks of multiple-modality exercise interventions with or without additional mind-motor training yielded similar improvements in cognition among community-dwelling older adults with subjective cognitive complaints. Although both groups improved GCF and memory during the study intervention and after the no-contact follow-up, the M4 group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in these outcomes at 52-weeks.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".