Resistance exercise effects on hippocampus subfield volumes and biomarkers of neuroplasticity and neuroinflammation in older adults with low and high risk of mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Physical exercise is suggested to promote hippocampal neuroplasticity by increasing circulating neurotrophic and anti-inflammatory factors. Our aim was to explore the interplay between the effect of progressive resistance exercise on blood biomarker levels, hippocampal neurometabolite levels and hippocampal volume in older adults with a low compared to a high risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Seventy apparently healthy male/female older adults (aged 60–85 years old) were randomly allocated to a 12 week lower limb progressive resistance or no intervention, stratified for low (< 26/30) or high (≥ 26/30) Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, indicating MCI risk. Outcome measures were blood levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6) or kynurenine (KYN); hippocampal total and subfield volumes of the cornu ammonis 1 (CA1) and 4 (CA4), subiculum, presubiculum, and dentate gyrus measured with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); and hippocampus neurometabolites including total N-acetylaspartate (NAA), myo-inositol (mIns), and total creatine (Cr) measured with proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy ( 1 H-MRS). We evaluated the intervention effect, cognitive status effect, their interaction and the bivariate relationship between exercise-induced changes between the outcome measures. Higher kynurenine levels (p = 0.015) and lower subiculum volumes (p = 0.043) were found in older adults with high MCI risk compared to older adults with low MCI risk. Exercise-induced CA1 volume changes were negatively correlated with hippocampal tNAA/mIns level changes (r = -0.605, p = 0.006). This study provides valuable insight in the multifactorial processes related to resistance training in older adults with low or high MCI risk.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".