Effects of Lower Limb Resistance Training on Cognitive Function in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Promoting healthy ageing is a major public health challenge, especially with increasing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) prevalence and associated dementia risk in older adults. Exercise training may improve cognitive function, yet studies on its effects in MCI populations remain limited and inconsistent in design and outcomes. This study investigated the impact of a 12-week structured lower limb resistance training (RT) programme on cognitive performance, specifically memory and executive function in older adults at low and high risk of MCI. Methods: Fifty-three older adults (aged 60–80) completed the study and were categorised into low risk (lrMCI, n = 28) and high risk (hrMCI, n = 25) MCI groups. Participants were assigned to a 12-week RT programme (2 sessions/week, 4 lower-limb exercises, 3 sets of 6–10 reps at 70–85% 1RM) or a passive control group. Cognitive performance was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and ANAM4™ neurocognitive battery before and after the intervention. Results: At week 12, participants with high risk MCI in the resistance training group showed a significant improvement in MoCA total scores, particularly in executive function and delayed recall domains. An increase in MoCA scores was also observed in the control group, suggesting a potential learning effect. Performance across ANAM4 cognitive tasks did not show statistically significant changes following the intervention. Conclusion: A twice-weekly RT programme over 12 weeks did not produce robust improvements across all cognitive domains, but trends suggested potential benefits in executive function and inhibitory control among older adults at higher risk of MCI. The cognitive response to RT appears to vary by MCI risk level and baseline cognitive status. Keywords: older adults, MoCA (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), executive function, memory, ANAM4 neurocognitive battery
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".