Breath Qigong Improves Recognition in Seniors With Vascular Cognitive Impairment.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) or vascular dementia is widely considered to be the second-most-common cause of dementia after Alzheimer's disease, accounting for 20% of cases. Little is known about the effectiveness of breath qigong for seniors suffering from VCI or dementia. OBJECTIVES: For seniors with VCI, the study aimed to compare the benefits of qigong practice, cognitive training, and qigong practice + cognitive training in improving cognitive function, memory, executive function, and daily problem-solving ability. DESIGN: The study was a randomized, controlled pilot study that used a prospective design with repeated measures. SETTING: The study took place at the Tianjin Medical University General Hospital (Tianjin, China). PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 93 patients with VCI at a clinic at the hospital. INTERVENTION: The participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: (1) qigong practice, an intervention group; (2) cognitive training, a positive control group; or (3) a combination of qigong practice and cognitive training, an intervention group. Participants received the treatments for 3 mo. OUTCOME MEASURES: All outcome measures were undertaken at baseline and postintervention. The measures included (1) the Montreal cognitive assessment, (2) the Loewenstein occupational therapy cognitive assessment, and (3) the Barthel activities of daily living index. RESULTS: All 3 groups showed significant improvements in general cognitive function, memory, executive function, and daily problem-solving ability (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Qigong practice is an easy and convenient exercise performed at no cost and has the potential to improve the cognitive functions of older adults with mild VCI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".