Physical activity–based interventions in the management of dementia or cognitive impairment in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to map the existing literature on physical activity-based interventions for the management of dementia and cognitive impairment in sub-Saharan Africa. INTRODUCTION: Dementia and cognitive impairment are growing public health concerns in sub-Saharan Africa, where the number of affected individuals is expected to rise significantly. Given the high rate of dementia underdiagnosis in this region, many individuals experiencing cognitive decline may not have a formal dementia diagnosis. Physical activity-based interventions, conceptualized in this review as both structured exercise programs (eg, aerobic training, resistance exercises) and unstructured physical activities (eg, walking, dancing, or daily movement-based activities), are increasingly used in cognitive impairment dementia care. However, most research in this area has been conducted in other regions, with limited knowledge of how these interventions are applied in sub-Saharan African countries. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The review will include studies focusing on individuals with dementia or cognitive impairment, where physical activity - based interventions are implemented. The setting will be sub-Saharan African countries, with no restrictions on the language or date of publication. METHODS: The review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search will be conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Embase, and African Journals Online databases. Gray literature sources, including Google Scholar and Database of African Theses and Dissertations-Research (DATAD-R), will also be searched. Data will be charted and summarized descriptively, with the results presented in narrative and visual formats. REVIEW REGISTRATION: OSF https://osf.io/gz65k.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".