MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409879851 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.26.25326488

Dancing Through Time: Cognitive Changes Over Six-Years of Community Dance in Parkinson’s Disease

2025· preprint· en· W4409879851 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Simran Rooprai, Ashkan Karimi, Rafia Rafique, E. D’Alessandro, Karolina A. Bearss, Sarah Robichaud, Rachel J. Bar, Joseph F. X. DeSouza

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParkinson Canada
KeywordsDanceParkinson's diseaseCognitionDiseasePsychologyMedicineGerontologyArtPsychiatryVisual artsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Parkinson’s Disease (PD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder after Alzheimer’s, and is characterized by motor and non-motor symptoms, including gait dysfunction and cognitive decline. Dance has emerged as a promising intervention for improving motor and non-motor symptoms in persons with PD (PwPD), yet long-term effects remain underexplored. Objective To assess changes in cognitive function and gait performance over six years among PwPD who participated in a weekly dance program, compared to a Reference group who remained physically inactive. Methods This six-year longitudinal observational study included 43 PwPD who attended weekly dance classes and were evaluated using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Movement Disorder Society–Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). A Reference group of 28 PwPD, matched on age, gender, and Hoehn & Yahr scores, were selected from the Parkinson’s Progression Marker Initiative, and assessed using the MDS-UPDRS and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Cognitive scores were standardized. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare cognitive and gait outcomes across time. Results The Dance group was significantly different from the Reference group ( p < 0.001), with improved cognitive scores in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The Dance group had worse gait at baseline, however, the Reference group showed significantly poorer gait performance by 2018. No significant association was found between gait and cognitive scores. Conclusion After two years of weekly dance, the Dance group showed improvements in cognition and maintained stability in gait performance. The findings highlight the potential neuroprotective benefits of continued dance engagement over six years.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicDiversity and Impact of DanceFrench-language works237,207