Two-year follow-up assessment of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the durability of Tai Chi on cognitive function in older adults with type 2 diabetes and mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Building upon established short-term benefits, this study aimed to assess Tai Chi's durability for preserving global and domain-specific cognition in older adults (≥ 60 years) with type 2 diabetes and mild cognitive impairment (T2D-MCI), compared to fitness walking and health education. METHODS: Participants (n = 328) were randomized 1:1:1 to Tai Chi, fitness walking, or health education groups, completing 24-week interventions. Cognitive outcomes-global cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA), executive function, attention, visuospatial ability, and language fluency-were evaluated at baseline, 24 weeks(post-intervention), 36 weeks, and 2 years. Linear mixed models analyzed group-by-time interactions, while time-dependent Cox regression quantified minimal clinically important difference (MCID) attainment (MoCA improvement ≥ 4 points). RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, linear mixed models revealed significant group-by-time interactions for MoCA (p < 0.001). The Tai Chi group showed greater MoCA improvement versus health education (mean difference: 1.8, 95% CI 0.3-3.3, p = 0.016). Crucially, 49.8% of Tai Chi practitioners achieved MCID-nearly double the probability of health education (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.4-2.8, p < 0.001) and exceeding fitness walking (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.4; p = 0.005). Tai Chi selectively enhanced executive function (shorter Stroop reaction times vs. health education, p < 0.05; fewer color-word errors vs. fitness walking, p = 0.049) and visuospatial ability (higher Rey-Osterrieth copy scores vs. health education, p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Tai Chi provides superior long-term preservation of global cognition and executive/visuospatial function in T2D-MCI older adults, with nearly 50% achieving clinically meaningful cognitive improvement. As a scalable mind-body intervention, it warrants integration into geriatric preventive care to mitigate dementia risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".