Effects of a Physical Activity and Brain Exercise Program on Cognitive Ability of Healthy Thai Elders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study used a quasi-experimental single-group time series design to compare the effects of a physical activity and brain exercise program on the cognitive ability of healthy Thai elders. It was conducted from December 2015 to May 2016. A purposive sample of 23 people of over 60 years of age was used. The research instruments consisted of 1) the Mini-Mental State Examination Thai 2002 (MMSE-Thai 2002), 2) the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA, Thai version), and 3) the physical activity and brain exercise program devised for this research. The program components were validated and reviewed by 3 experts and yielded a content validity index (CVI) of 0.96. Participants attended the program 8 times (3 h each) over 5 consecutive weeks. Subsequently, participant follow-up progress reviews were done in weeks 10, 14, and 18. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ANOVA with Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test and repeated measures ANOVA. Results revealed that the average score for cognitive ability (Mental State and cognitive function) in weeks 10 and 14 and at follow-up in week 18 were statistically significantly higher (p < .05) than the baseline. Recommendation: the physical activity and brain exercise program could improve cognitive ability and should be included in health promoting activities in elders’ clubs or senior schools in the future.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".