Effects of Exercise Alone or Combined With Cognitive Training and Vitamin D Supplementation to Improve Cognition in Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Exercise, cognitive training, and vitamin D may enhance cognition in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Objective: To determine whether aerobic-resistance exercises would improve cognition relative to an active control and if a multidomain intervention including exercises, computerized cognitive training, and vitamin D supplementation would show greater improvements than exercise alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial (the SYNERGIC Study) was a multisite, double-masked, fractional factorial trial that evaluated the effects of aerobic-resistance exercise, computerized cognitive training, and vitamin D on cognition. Eligible participants were between ages 65 and 84 years with MCI enrolled from September 19, 2016, to April 7, 2020. Data were analyzed from February 2021 to December 2022. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 5 study arms and treated for 20 weeks: arm 1 (multidomain intervention with exercise, cognitive training, and vitamin D), arm 2 (exercise, cognitive training, and placebo vitamin D), arm 3 (exercise, sham cognitive training, and vitamin D), arm 4 (exercise, sham cognitive training, and placebo vitamin D), and arm 5 (control group with balance-toning exercise, sham cognitive training, and placebo vitamin D). The vitamin D regimen was a 10 000 IU dose 3 times weekly. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were changes in ADAS-Cog-13 and Plus variant at 6 months. Results: Among 175 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [6.6] years; 86 [49.1%] women), 144 (82%) completed the intervention and 133 (76%) completed the follow-up (month 12). At 6 months, all active arms (ie, arms 1 through 4) with aerobic-resistance exercise regardless of the addition of cognitive training or vitamin D, improved ADAS-Cog-13 when compared with control (mean difference, -1.79 points; 95% CI, -3.27 to -0.31 points; P = .02; d = 0.64). Compared with exercise alone (arms 3 and 4), exercise and cognitive training (arms 1 and 2) improved the ADAS-Cog-13 (mean difference, -1.45 points; 95% CI, -2.70 to -0.21 points; P = .02; d = 0.39). No significant improvement was found with vitamin D. Finally, the multidomain intervention (arm 1) improved the ADAS-Cog-13 score significantly compared with control (mean difference, -2.64 points; 95% CI, -4.42 to -0.80 points; P = .005; d = 0.71). Changes in ADAS-Cog-Plus were not significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this clinical trial, older adults with MCI receiving aerobic-resistance exercises with sequential computerized cognitive training significantly improved cognition, although some results were inconsistent. Vitamin D supplementation had no effect. Our findings suggest that this multidomain intervention may improve cognition and potentially delay dementia onset in MCI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02808676.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".