Square-stepping Exercises versus Conventional Exercises on Cognition and Risk of Fall in Postmenopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim: Menopause is the cessation of menstruation resulting from the loss of ovarian follicular activity. During menopause, there is a loss of estrogen which diminishes protective reflexes, increment bone resorption, thus speeding up bone loss. This has been seen as significant factor for decline in postural balance. Functional imaging shows that estrogen also regulates neural movement during the execution of intellectual assignments. Thus, women attaining menopause complain of issues with memory. The aim of this study was to compare square-stepping exercises (SSEs) and conventional physiotherapy training on cognition and risk of fall. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five postmenopausal women, attained >5 years of menopause up to 65 years of age were included in the study and were randomly allocated into SSEs Group A ( n = 18) and conventional physiotherapy training Group B ( n = 17). Cognition was assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and balance was assessed by the Berg's Balance Scale at pre, post-2 weeks, and post-4 weeks of intervention. Results: Paired t -test and unpaired t -test were used for within and between-group analysis for Berg's Balance Scale. Wilcoxon test was used for within-group analysis and Mann–Whitney test was used for between-group analysis for Montreal Cognitive Assessment. The level of significance was determined by P < 0.05 at 95% confidence interval. Statistically significant improvements were seen in both groups ( P < 0.05), whereas between-group analysis, there was no significant difference with P > 0.05. Conclusion: Both types of exercise protocol were equally effective in improving cognition and preventing the risk of fall in postmenopausal women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".