Traditional Thai exercise (Ruesi Dadton) for improving motor and cognitive functions in mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study determined the effectiveness of a 12-week cycle of Ruesi Dadton (RSD) among older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), for improving cognitive and physical performance. Seventy-six participants were included and were divided equally into two groups. A group performed RSD exercise for 60 min, 3 times/wk for 12 weeks, and the control group did not perform RSD exercise. The primary endpoint was cognitive function, as assessed by the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), Mini-Mental State Examination, verbal fluency (VF) test, and trail making test parts A and B (TMT-A and TMT-B). The secondary endpoints were the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, handgrip, and gait speed results, which were used to evaluate the physical function. There were significant differences in the TMT-B and handgrip scores (P< 0.05) between the two groups. Both groups had improved MoCA scores (P< 0.05) and normal walking speeds (P< 0.01). Additionally, the RSD group showed improved VF test (P< 0.01), TMT-B (P< 0.01), and TUG test (P< 0.05); a negative correlation was found between MoCA and TUG test (P< 0.05). However, high walking speed and handgrip (P< 0.05) worsened in the control group. RSD exercise resulted in relevant improvements in the cognitive and physical functions in MCI.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".