MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386273986 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000034905

Effects of mind-body exercise on cognitive performance in middle-aged and older adults with mild cognitive impairment: A meta-analysis study

2023· review· en· W4386273986 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mengzhao Wang, Xiaomei Li, Ran Fei, Yanbai Han

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Social Science Fund of China
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisPhysical therapyCognitionPsychological interventionInclusion and exclusion criteriaMini–Mental State ExaminationStrictly standardized mean differenceMEDLINEGerontologyCognitive impairmentInternal medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy of physical and mental exercise on cognitive performance in middle-aged people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: Computer searches of PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China Biomedical Literature Service, Wanfang database, China Knowledge Network, and VIP full-text database of Veep journals were conducted to obtain clinical randomized controlled trials on physical and mental exercise interventions in middle-aged and elderly people with MCI. The literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the final included literature was subjected to data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.1 software, and publication bias test was performed using stata17.0 software. RESULTS: A total of 27 publications with a total of 2565 cases of elderly people with MCI were included. The control group was conventional care, health education, or blank control, and the physical and mental exercise group was exercises including Tai Chi, dance, orthopraxia, and qigong for 30 to 90 minutes each time, 3 to 6 times per week, for a total duration of 8 to 36 weeks. Meta-analysis results showed that Montreal cognitive assessment scores (mean difference [MD] = 2.33, 95% CI [1.55, 3.10], P < .00001), the mini-mental state examination score (MD = 1.73, 95% CI [0.60, 2.86], P = .003), trail making test-A score (MD = -4.00, 95% CI [-6.75, -1.25], P = .004), trail making test-B score (MD = -18.46, 95% CI [-23.87, -13.06], P < .00001), global deterioration scale score (MD = -0.72, 95% CI [-1.09, -0.34], P = .0002), Wechsler Logical Memory Scale score (MD = 2.07, 95% CI [0.03, 4.10], P = .05), berg score (MD = -0.70, 95% CI [0.32, 1.07], P < .0003), cerebrospinal fluid Tau protein level (MD = -166.69, 95% CI [-196.93, -136.45], P < .00001), and cerebrospinal fluid levels of αβ1-42 protein (MD = 180.39, 95% CI [134.24, 226.55], P < .00001). CONCLUSION: Mind-body exercise can improve cognitive performance, depressive status, and balance as well as increase αβ1-42 protein levels and decrease Tau protein levels in middle-aged and older adults with mild cognitive impairment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.046
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207