MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effects Of Boxing Training On Cognitive And Physical Function In Patients With Parkinson’s Disease

2018· article· en· W2805211458 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristina Y. Shearon, Alexa V. Convers, Tjahane Holmes, Shannon L. Mathis

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionPhysical therapyBalance (ability)PsychologyFlexibility (engineering)MedicineCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Boxing training is a community based exercise program incorporating high intensity exercise for patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). A 90 min boxing session consists of performing footwork to improve balance and agility, performing punching combinations to develop coordination, and engaging in vocal exercises to strengthen the voice. Flexibility exercises are performed to reduce muscle rigidity. Core strengthening and weight lifting exercises are performed to strengthen muscles. Long-term benefits of boxing training include improvements in gait, balance, activities of daily living, and quality of life. An immediate effect of this nontraditional form of exercise on cognitive function, strength, and fall risk has not been explored. PURPOSE The purpose of the study was to investigate the immediate effect of a single boxing training session on cognitive and physical function in patients with PD. The hypothesis was that cognitive function, fall risk, and functional strength would improve immediately following a boxing training session. METHODS Cognitive function was measured with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The MoCA assesses attention, concentration, executive function, orientation, language, memory, conceptual thinking, and calculation. The physical function tests included an assessment of fall risk with the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) test. The Sit-to-Stand (STS) test was used to assess functional strength. Measurements were performed before and immediately after the boxing session. RESULTS Participants were male and female persons with PD (N = 13) with a mean age of 70 (±8.2) years, who attended a mean of 2.5 (±0.7) boxing sessions weekly. Mean body mass index was 31.1 (±7.0) kg[BULLET OPERATOR]m-2. The MoCA score increased from pre (24.2 ± 3.8) to post (25.7 ± 4.4) boxing session, t(12) = -2.9, p =.01. TUG times did not statistically improve from pre (7.8 s ±2.2) to post (7.4 s ± 2.4) exercise, t(12) = 1.6, p = .13. Participants were able to perform more chair stands after (18.31 ± 6.61) compared to before the training session (16.4 ± 6.4), t(12) = 2.4, p = .03. CONCLUSION An improvement in cognitive and physical function was observed following a single session of boxing training in patients with PD. Performing a single boxing session may lead to improved cognitive function and functional strength throughout the day.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders→French-language works237,207→