Effects of computerized cognitive training combined with aerobic exercise on patients with early Post-Stroke Cognitive Impairment: a randomized controlled trial (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have demonstrated that the combination of computerized cognitive training (CCT) and aerobic exercise produces more significant therapeutic effects on cognitive function compared to either intervention alone.However, its impact on specific cognitive domains remains unclear.Objective: This study was aim to investigate the rehabilitative effects of computerized cognitive training combined with aerobic exercise on cognitive domains in patients with post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) using objective indicators.Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary hospital in northern China, recruiting 134 participants with PSCI who were randomly assigned to either the control group (n=67) or the intervention group (n=67) using an opaque envelope method.Both groups received 30-minute interventions five times a week.Changes in cognitive domains, global cognitive function, activities of daily living, stroke severity, and quality of life (QOL) were compared prior to the intervention, at 3 months, and at 6 months post-intervention.Results: Of the 109 participants who completed the full intervention and follow-up, analysis of the 5 cognitive function variables revealed a significant group × time interaction for all variables except visuospatial ability, favoring the intervention group (global cognitive function [Wald c2=26.437,P<0.001], memory [Wald c2=67.781,P<0.001], attention [Wald c2=12.174,P=0.002], execution [Wald c2=136.341,P<0.001], visuospatial ability [Wald c2=3.755,P=0.153]).Additionally, both activities of daily living and QOL also showed significant group × time interactions, favoring the intervention group. Conclusions:The combination of CCT and aerobic exercise effectively enhanced the cognitive function of patients with PSCI, particularly in the areas of memory, attention, and execution.Moreover, it improved activities of daily living and QOL.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".