MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404327043 · doi:10.1002/gps.70012

Comparing 30 Versus 60 min Cognitively Loaded Physical Exercise on Cognitive Function and Physical Health in Community‐Dwelling Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Double‐Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4404327043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sung‐Hyeon Kim, Ho‐Jin Shin, Ji‐Eun Baek, Ji Young Park, May Kim, Suk‐Chan Hahm, Hwi-young Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of EducationGachon UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsCognitionDementiaPsychosocialPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance (ability)GerontologyPsychologyGaitCognitive declinePhysical fitnessRandomized controlled trialMedicinePsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is characterized by a mild decline in cognitive function and represents a risk stage for dementia in community-dwelling older adults. Exercise and dual-task training have been used to improve physical health, psychosocial health, and cognitive and learning functions in various subjects. However, the optimal time for these interventions has yet to be clearly identified. This study investigated the effects of cognitively loaded physical exercise (CLPE) on cognitive function and physical health in community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment and compared the differences according to exercise time. METHODS: Fifty-one community-dwelling aged 60 years or older with MCI were randomly assigned to 30-min CLPE (30CLPE, n = 17), 60-min CLPE (60CLPE, n = 17), and control (n = 17) groups. The CLPE program consisted of a twice-weekly exercise program for 8 weeks. During the exercise, a dual task was performed to assess cognitive load. The control group performed a typical exercise program at a dementia center during the same period. The Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment was used to evaluate cognitive function, and various physical health factors were assessed using the handgrip dynamometer and pinch gauge, Senior Fitness Test, dynamic and static balance abilities, and gait variables. RESULTS: After the intervention, both the 30CLPE and 60CLPE groups showed significant improvements in cognitive function, upper limb strength, senior fitness, balance, and gait (p < 0.05), while the control group showed no significant changes in any of the variables (p > 0.05). In between-group comparisons, both CLPE groups showed significantly improved cognitive and physical functions compared to the control group (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the 30 CLPE and 60 CLPE groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that cognitively loaded physical exercise is effective in improving cognitive and physical function in individuals with MCI. Both the 30-min and 60-min sessions resulted in significant improvements, with no statistically significant differences observed between the two durations. This suggests that persistence and consistency of exercise may be more important than the duration of individual sessions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov: KCT0009053.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Geriatric PsychiatrySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207