MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exercise programs for people with dementia

2013· review· en· W4211184021 on OpenAlexaff
Dorothy Forbes, Emily Thiessen, Catherine Blake, Scott C. Forbes, Sean C. Forbes

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyRandomized controlled trialActivities of daily livingInclusion (mineral)Depression (economics)CognitionPhysical therapyPsychiatryPsychologyNursingDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This is an update of our previous 2008 review. Several recent trials and systematic reviews of the impact of exercise on people with dementia are reporting promising findings. OBJECTIVES: Primary: Do exercise programs for older people with dementia improve cognition, activities of daily living (ADLs), challenging behaviour, depression, and mortality in older people with dementia?Secondary: Do exercise programs for older people with dementia have an indirect impact on family caregivers' burden, quality of life, and mortality?Do exercise programs for older people with dementia reduce the use of healthcare services (e.g. visits to the emergency department) by participants and their family caregivers? SEARCH METHODS: We identified trials for inclusion in the review by searching ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois), the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register, on 4 September 2011, and again on 13 August 2012. The search terms used were: 'physical activity' OR exercise OR cycling OR swim* OR gym* OR walk* OR danc* OR yoga OR 'tai chi'. SELECTION CRITERIA: In this review, we included randomized controlled trials in which older people, diagnosed with dementia, were allocated either to exercise programs or to control groups (usual care or social contact/activities) with the aim of improving cognition, ADLs, behaviour, depression, and mortality. Secondary outcomes related to the family caregiver(s) and included caregiver burden, quality of life, mortality, and use of healthcare services. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Independently, at least two authors assessed the retrieved articles for inclusion, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data. Data were analysed for summary effects using RevMan 5.1 software. We calculated mean differences or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and synthesized data for each outcome using a fixed-effect model, unless there was substantial heterogeneity between studies, when we used a random-effects model. We planned to explore heterogeneity in relation to severity and type of dementia, and type, frequency, and duration of exercise program. We also evaluated adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen trials with 937 participants met the inclusion criteria. However, the required data from three trials and some of the data from a fourth trial were not published and not made available. The included trials were highly heterogeneous in terms of subtype and severity of participants' dementia, and type, duration and frequency of exercise. Only two trials included participants living at home. Our meta-analysis suggested that exercise programs might have a significant impact on improving cognitive functioning (eight trials, 329 participants; SMD 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.09). However, there was substantial heterogeneity between trials (I(2) value 80%), most of which we were unable to explain. We repeated the analysis omitting one trial, an outlier, that included only participants with moderate or severe dementia. This reduced the heterogeneity somewhat (I(2) value 68%), and produced a result that was no longer significant (seven trials, 308 participants; SMD 0.31, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.74). We found a significant effect of exercise programs on the ability of people with dementia to perform ADLs (six studies, 289 participants; SMD 0.68, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.27). However, again we observed considerable unexplained statistical heterogeneity (I(2) value 77%) in this meta-analysis. This means that there is a need for caution in interpreting these findings. In further analyses, we found that the burden experienced by informal caregivers providing care in the home may be reduced when they supervise the participation of the family member with dementia in an exercise program (one study, 40 participants; MD -15.30, 95% CI -24.73 to -5.87), but we found no significant effect of exercise on challenging behaviours (one study, 110 participants; MD -0.60, 95% CI -4.22 to 3.02), or depression (six studies, 341 participants; MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.07) . We could not examine the remaining outcomes, quality of life, mortality, and healthcare costs, as either the appropriate data were not reported, or we did not retrieve trials that examined these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is promising evidence that exercise programs can have a significant impact in improving ability to perform ADLs and possibly in improving cognition in people with dementia, although some caution is advised in interpreting these findings. The programs revealed no significant effect on challenging behaviours or depression. There was little or no evidence regarding the remaining outcomes of interest.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.011

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.246 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations156
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207