MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295048239 · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06699-7

Reshaping the path of mild cognitive impairment by refining exercise prescription: a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial to understand the “what,” “for whom,” and “how” of exercise to promote cognitive function

2022· article· en· W4295048239 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cindy K. Barha, Ryan S. Falck, John R. Best, Lindsay S. Nagamatsu, Ging‐Yuek Robin Hsiung, A. William Sheel, Chun Liang Hsu, Arthur F. Kramer, Michelle W. Voss, Kirk I. Erickson, Jennifer C. Davis, J. Kevin Shoemaker, Lara A. Boyd, Rachel A. Crockett, Lisanne ten Brinke, Louis Bherer, Joel Singer, Liisa A.M. Galea, Claudia Jacova, Alexis Bullock, Sofia Grant, Teresa Liu‐Ambrose

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversité de MontréalWestern UniversityUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia HospitalVancouver Coastal HealthVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteMontreal Heart InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalOkanagan CollegeSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialCognitionDementiaCognitive trainingPhysical therapyCognitive declineAerobic exercisePhysical medicine and rehabilitationExercise prescriptionGerontologyDiseasePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Targeted exercise training is a promising strategy for promoting cognitive function and preventing dementia in older age. Despite the utility of exercise as an intervention, variation still exists in exercise-induced cognitive gains and questions remain regarding the type of training (i.e., what), as well as moderators (i.e., for whom) and mechanisms (i.e., how) of benefit. Both aerobic training (AT) and resistance training (RT) enhance cognitive function in older adults without cognitive impairment; however, the vast majority of trials have focused exclusively on AT. Thus, more research is needed on RT, as well as on the combination of AT and RT, in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a prodromal stage of dementia. Therefore, we aim to conduct a 6-month, 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial in older adults with MCI to assess the individual effects of AT and RT, and the combined effect of AT and RT on cognitive function and to determine the possible underlying biological mechanisms. METHODS: Two hundred and sixteen community-dwelling adults, aged 65 to 85 years, with MCI from metropolitan Vancouver will be recruited to participate in this study. Randomization will be stratified by biological sex and participants will be randomly allocated to one of the four experimental groups: (1) 4×/week balance and tone (BAT; i.e., active control); (2) combined 2×/week AT + 2×/week RT; (3) 2×/week AT + 2×/week BAT; or (4) 2×/week RT + 2×/week BAT. The primary outcome is cognitive function as measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive-Plus. Secondary outcomes include cognitive function, health-related quality of life, physical function, actigraphy measures, questionnaires, and falls. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, 6 months (i.e., trial completion), and 18 months (i.e., 12-month follow-up). DISCUSSION: Establishing the efficacy of different types and combinations of exercise training to minimize cognitive decline will advance our ability to prescribe exercise as "medicine" to treat MCI and delay the onset and progression of dementia. This trial is extremely timely as cognitive impairment and dementia pose a growing threat to global public health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02737878 . Registered on April 14, 2016.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207