MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408684822 · doi:10.20883/medical.e1240

Long-term impact of physical activity on the prevention of cognitive function decline: study protocol for an extended randomized controlled trial (PA Protect study)

2025· article· en· W4408684822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ada Maria Adamczak, Małgorzata Jamka, Klaudia Kotecka‐Majchrzak, Aleksandra Makarewicz-Bukowska, Jan Brylak, Anna Dzudzewicz, Edyta Mądry, Jan Krzysztof Nowak, Karl‐Heinz Herzig, Jarosław Walkowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialProtocol (science)CognitionTerm (time)Physical activityGerontologyMedicineCognitive declinePhysical therapyPsychologyDementiaAlternative medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPhysicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The PA Protect study investigated the impact of increased daily physical activity on preventing cognitive decline, and maintaining healthy biomarker levels in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Participants aged 50-70 years, selected based on their performance in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test were enrolled in a double-blind randomized controlled trial and randomly assigned to either an active or passive group. The active group was instructed to achieve over 10,000 daily steps, while the passive group maintained usual activity levels. Preliminary findings revealed a positive influence of increased physical activity on cognitive function, with significant differences observed between the two groups in selected cognitive tests. Building on these results, this study extends the PA Protect trial for an additional three years. All participants will undergo cognitive assessments and biomarker analyses at the beginning and after the extended intervention period, providing further insights into long-term intervention effects.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.007

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.414 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical ScienceSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207