Effect of Baduanjin exercise on executive function in older adults with cognitive frailty: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of Baduanjin exercise on executive function in community-dwelling older adults with cognitive frailty. Design Randomized controlled trial. Setting Community residential centers. Subjects 120 eligible older adults. Interventions Baduanjin training group received supervised Baduanjin training, 60 min sessions three times per week for 24 weeks. The control group did not receive any exercise intervention. Main measures Primary outcome was executive function, assessed using Clock Drawing Test. Secondary outcomes included the subcomponents of executive function (working memory, inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility), attention and cognitive frailty (global cognitive function, physical frailty) assessed using Verbal Fluency Test, Trail Making Test-A/B, Stroop Test, Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Edmonton Frailty Scale, respectively, at baseline and 24 weeks after intervention. Results After the 24-week intervention, the scores of Clock Drawing Test and Verbal Fluency Test, the Trail Making Test-B time and the Card correct numbers of Stroop Test in Baduanjin training group showed significant improvement compared with control group (all P < 0.05) with small to moderate effect sizes and the significant interaction effect of group by time in the Clock Drawing Test and Trail Making Test-B test ( P = 0.003 and P = 0.043); cognitive frailty variables, including Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Edmonton Frail Scale scores, also showed significant improvement ( P = 0.002 and P = 0.004) with a moderate effect sizes and a significant interaction effect ( P < 0.001, P = 0.013). No adverse events were reported. Conclusion Regular Baduanjin training may be an effective and safe intervention to improve cognitive frailty and executive function in community-dwelling older adults with cognitive frailty. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2100050857. Data of registration: 8/5/2020, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj = 133037 .
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".