Physical activity for older Australians with mild cognitive impairment or subjective cognitive decline – A narrative review to support guideline development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This review informed development of the first national Physical Activity (PA) Guidelines for Older Australians with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD) (http://www.dementiaresearch.org.au/images/dcrc/output-files/1567-pa_guidelines_for_mci_or_scd_full_report_final.pdf). These guidelines are directed at healthcare professionals and aim to encourage older adults with SCD/MCI to engage in PA to enhance cognitive, mental and physical health. DESIGN: A narrative review was undertaken to inform the guideline adaptation process. METHODS: A systematic search of existing PA guidelines for older adults was performed and evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument. The guideline assessed as most appropriate was adapted to the population with SCD/MCI using the Guideline Adaptation Resource Toolkit, supported by the narrative review. RESULTS: The search for existing PA guidelines for older adults yielded 22 guidelines, none of which specifically considered older adults with SCD/MCI. The Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines for Older Adults were selected for adaptation to the population with SCD/MCI. The narrative review found 24 high-quality randomised controlled trials and 17 observational studies. These supported the four guideline recommendations that address aerobic PA, progressive resistance training, balance exercises and consultation with healthcare professionals to tailor PA to the individual. CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence to support the four guideline recommendations. These recommendations provide specific guidance for older adults with SCD/MCI, their families, health professionals, community organisations and government to obtain benefits from undertaking PA. The review also highlights important future research directions, including the need for targeted translation and implementation research for diverse consumers.
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 | 0.016 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".