Effects of a specially designed aerobic dance routine on mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is known as a transitional stage or phase between normal aging and dementia. In addition, it is associated with an increased risk of dementia. Research has shown that moderate-intensity exercise is associated with a decreased risk of cognitive impairment. Two recent studies demonstrated that dance interventions are associated with improved cognitive function in the elderly with MCI. Purpose: We evaluated the effect of a moderate-intensity aerobic dance routine on the cognitive function in patients with MCI. Patients and methods: This is a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Sixty MCI patients were randomized to receive either treatment (aerobic dance routine + usual care) or control (usual care only) for 3 months. All patients received usual care for an additional 3 months thereafter. The aerobic dance routine was a specially designed dance routine which involved cognitive effort for patients to memorize the complex movements. Wechsler memory scale-revised logical memory (WMS-R LM) and event-related evoked potentials (ERPs) P300 latency were used to assess patients’ cognitive function at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Results: Twenty-nine patients received exercise therapy and 31 patients received usual care. Patients in the treatment group showed a greater improvement in memory (difference in WMS-R LM changes over 3 months 4.6; 95% CI 2.2, 7.0; p <0.001) and processing speed (difference in P300 latency changes over 6 months -20.0; 95% CI=-39.5, -0.4; p <0.05) compared to control. Conclusion: This dance routine improves cognitive function, especially episodic memory and processing speed, in MCI patients and merits promotion in communities. Keywords: mild cognitive impairment, dance, cognitive function, memory
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".