Effect of combined physical–cognitive training on the functional and cognitive capacity of older people with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increase in population aging highlights the growing prevalence of mild cognitive impairment, prompting the adoption of interventions that combine physical exercise and cognitive training to improve health and cognitive performance in older adults. The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of a combined program on physical and cognitive health in older people with cognitive impairment. METHODS: A 12-week randomized controlled clinical trial involving 95 participants (aged 72.12 ± 4.25 years), 47 individuals participated in a control group (CG) that only underwent cognitive stimulation, while 48 individuals were in an experimental group (EG) that participated in a combined program. Balance was measured using the Tinetti scale, upper body strength was assessed with the arm curl test, lower body strength was evaluated with the 30-s chair stand test, flexibility was tested using the back scratch test and chair sit-and-reach test, physical function was measured with the Timed Up and Go test, cognitive function was assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination, cognitive impairment was evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, verbal fluency was tested with the Isaac test, and executive functions were assessed using the Trail Making Test. RESULTS: The results of the study show significant improvements in both physical and cognitive aspects, such as balance, gait, upper and lower body strength, flexibility, physical function, cognitive function, cognitive impairment, verbal fluency, and executive functions in the group that carried out the intervention compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: A combined program for older individuals with mild cognitive impairment leads to enhancements in physical and cognitive health. These improvements underscore the importance of integrating physical exercise with cognitive training as an effective strategy for enhancing overall health and quality of life in older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05503641.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".