MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3201390266 · doi:10.2196/33589

Harnessing Neuroplasticity to Promote Brain Health in Aging Adults: Protocol for the MOVE-Cog Intervention Study

2021· article· en· W3201390266 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Danylo F. Cabral, Carrie Hinchman, Christina Nunez, Jordyn Rice, David Loewenstein, Lawrence P. Cahalin, Tatjana Rundek, Álvaro Pascual‐Leone, Joyce Gomes‐Osman

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessCognitionAerobic exerciseMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)NeuroplasticityCognitive trainingPhysical therapyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Extensive evidence supports a link between aerobic exercise and cognitive improvements in aging adults. A major limitation with existing research is the high variability in cognitive response to exercise. Our incomplete understanding of the mechanisms that influence this variability and the low adherence to exercise are critical knowledge gaps and major barriers for the systematic implementation of exercise for promoting cognitive health in aging. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to provide an in-person and remotely delivered intervention study protocol with the main goal of informing the knowledge gap on the mechanistic action of exercise on the brain by characterizing important mechanisms of neuroplasticity, cardiorespiratory fitness response, and genetics proposed to underlie cognitive response to exercise. METHODS: This is an open-label, 2-month, interventional study protocol in neurologically healthy sedentary adults. This study was delivered fully in-person and in remote options. Participants underwent a total of 30 sessions, including the screening session, 3 pretest (baseline) assessments, 24 moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise sessions, and 3 posttest assessments. We recruited participants aged 55 years and above, sedentary, and cognitively healthy. Primary outcomes were neuroplasticity, cognitive function, and cardiorespiratory fitness. Secondary outcomes included genetic factors, endothelium function, functional mobility and postural control, exercise questionnaires, depression, and sleep. We also explored study feasibility, exercise adherence, technology adaptability, and compliance of both in-person and remote protocols. RESULTS: The recruitment phase and data collection of this study have concluded. Results are expected to be published by the end of 2021 or in early 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The data generated in these studies will introduce tangible parameters to guide the development of personalized exercise prescription models for maximal cognitive benefit in aging adults. Successful completion of the specific aims will enable researchers to acquire the appropriate expertise to design and conduct studies by testing personalized exercise interventions in person and remotely delivered, likely to be more effective at promoting cognitive health in aging adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03804528; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03804528. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/33589.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.011

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→