Aerobic Training Increases Hippocampal Volume and Protects Cognitive Function for Type 2 Diabetes Patients with Normal Cognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the effects of aerobic training on hippocampal volume and cognitive function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with normal cognition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred patients with T2DM aged 60-75 years who met inclusion criteria were randomized into the aerobic training group (n=50) and control group (n=50). The aerobic training group received 1 year of aerobic training, while the control group maintained their lifestyle without additional exercise intervention. The primary outcomes were hippocampal volume measured by MRI and Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) score or Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale (MoCA) scores. RESULTS: Eighty-two participants completed the study (aerobic training group, n=40; control group, n=42). There was no significant difference between the two groups at baseline (P>0.05). After one year of moderate aerobic training, increase in total and right hippocampal volume in the aerobic training group were significantly higher than in the control group (P=0.027, P=0.043, respectively). In the aerobic group, total hippocampal volume significantly increased after the intervention compared with baseline (P=0.034). The between-group difference in the change of MMSE and MoCA scores was statistically significant (P=0.015, P=0.027, respectively). Logistic regression showed strong correlations between aerobic training and increase in total hippocampal volume (OR:1.091, [95%CI 0.969, 1.228], P=0.002), improvement of MMSE scores (OR:1.127, [95%CI 1.005, 1.263], P=0.041) or MoCA scores (OR:2.564, [95%CI 2.098.2.973], P=0.045). CONCLUSIONS: One-year moderate aerobic training increased total and right hippocampal volume and protected cognitive function for T2DM patients with normal cognition. Early intervention focusing on cognition protection should be considered for T2DM patients in clinical settings.
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 | 0.000 | 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".