Effect Af A Multicomponent Exercise Program On Functional Capacity And Cognitive Function In Frail Community Elders With Cognitive Decline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Both frailty and mild cognitive impairment are prevalent issues among the geriatric population but have traditionally been evaluated on separate terms. Given the growing evidence that these two conditions might share a biological substrate, interventions aiming to improve physical function might as well induce benefits on cognitive function. The main objective was to test the effect of a multicomponent exercise program (VIVIFRAIL) on both domains in frail and pre-frail patients (according to Fried criteria) with evidence of mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia (Reisberg GDS 3 and 4). METHODS: We performed a preliminary analysis of 96 recruited patients (mean age 83±5) from three Spanish hospitals (San Sebastian, Pamplona and Getafe). Subjects were randomized to a control or an intervention group, the last one undergoing a 12-week multicomponent exercise program (VIVIFRAIL). Changes in functional capacity were evaluated through Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), one leg press repetition maximum strength (1-RM) and Barthel index, and those in cognitive function with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MOCA), verbal fluency and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). RESULTS: Significant improvement was found in the following variables: SPPB improved in 1.14 points (p=0.002), 1-RM improved in 12 points (p=0.035), MOCA test improved in 3.32 points (p=0.033) and verbal fluency improved in 2 points (p=0.028) in the intervention group versus the control group. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent exercise intervention program using the VIVIFRAIL methodology improves both functional capacity and cognitive function in frail and prefrail elderly patients who exhibit mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".