Five weeks of Yuishinkai karate training improves balance and neuromuscular function in older adults: a preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Martial arts training has shown positive impacts on balance and physiological measurements. Further investigation of the contents and feasibility of an effective therapeutic assessment of martial arts is needed in older adults, mainly for future applications and real-world implementation. Methods Sixteen older adults (8 male, 8 female, age 59–90 years), with or without chronic conditions, participated in a preliminary study using 5-weeks of karate training and a triple baseline control procedure. Group and single subject data analyses were conducted for dynamic balance, Timed Up and Go (TUG), hand grip, ankle plantarflexion force, and spinal cord excitability (via the soleus H-reflex) pre- and post-training. Results On average, participants completed a total of 2437 steps, 1762 turns, 3585 stance changes, 2047 punches, 2757 blocks, and 1253 strikes. Karate training improved dynamic balance performance such that the group average time was reduced (time to target (−13.6%, p = 0.020) and time to center (−8.3%, p = 0.010)). TUG was unchanged when considering the entire group (p = 0.779), but six participants displayed significant changes. Left handgrip (7.9%, p = 0.037), and plantarflexion force in the right (28.8%, p = 0.045) and left leg (13.3%, p = 0.024) increased for the group. Spinal cord excitability remained unchanged in group data analysis but 5 individuals had modulated Hmax/Mmax ratios. Conclusion 5-weeks of karate training delivered in a fashion to mimic generally accessible community-level programs improved balance and strength in older adults. Whole-body movement embodied in karate training enhanced neuromuscular function and postural control. We met the overriding goal of this preliminary study to emphasize and assess feasibility and safety for the generalizability of martial arts interventions to real-world communities to impact health outcomes. Further quantitative work should explore threshold dose and development of martial arts training interventions as potential “exercise is medicine” functional fitness for older adults.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".