MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015292766 · doi:10.2196/16841

Effectiveness of Exergaming in Improving Cognitive and Physical Function in People With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia: Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3015292766 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsDementiaPsycINFOCognitionPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapySystematic reviewActivities of daily livingPsychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Individuals with mild cognitive impairment and dementia have impaired physical and cognitive functions, leading to a reduced quality of life compared with those without such impairment. Exergaming, which is defined as a combination of exercise and gaming, is an innovative, fun, and relatively safe way to exercise in a virtual reality or gaming environment. Therefore, exergaming may help people living with mild cognitive impairment or dementia to overcome obstacles that they may experience regarding regular exercise and activities. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to review studies on exergaming interventions administered to elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment and dementia, and to summarize the results related to physical and cognitive functions such as balance, gait, executive function, and episodic memory. METHODS: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Amed, and Nursing Database for articles published from the inception of the respective databases to January 2019. We included all clinical trials of exergaming interventions in individuals with mild cognitive impairment and dementia for review. The risk of bias was independently evaluated by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tools. RESULTS: Ten studies involving 702 participants were included for review. There was consistent evidence from 7 studies with a low risk of bias showing statistically significant effects of exergaming on cognitive functioning in people with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. With respect to physical function, 3 of 5 full-scale studies found positive results, and the intensity of most games was classified as moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, exergaming is an innovative tool for improving physical and cognitive function in people with mild cognitive impairment or dementia, although there is high heterogeneity among studies in terms of the duration, frequency, and gaming platform used. The quality of the included articles was moderate to high. More high-quality studies with more accurate outcome indicators are needed for further exploration and validation of the benefits of exergaming for this population.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.320 · 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