Effects of a moderate combined exercise program on cognitive function, quality of life, and glycemic profile in older adults with type II diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The risk of developing non-communicable chronic diseases, such as Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), has increased due to factors such as sedentary behavior, the adoption of nutrient-poor dietary patterns, and an increase in population longevity. Regular physical activity has been shown to lower these risks and prevent chronic non-communicable diseases. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess how a combined training program affects the Quality of Life (QoL), cognitive function, and glycemic profile of older people with T2DM. METHODS: Forty-three senior citizens participated in this experimental study. The process of assessing the glucose profile involved drawing 20 milliliters of peripheral blood for laboratory examination. The WHOQOL-Old and WHOQOL-Bref questionnaires were used to assess QoL, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used to measure cognitive function. Targeting the main muscular groups, the intervention includes combination training for 12-weeks, twice a week, comprising leg press, calf raises, chest press, rowing, leg curls, and abdominal exercises. There was also thirty minutes of moderate intensity aerobic cycling exercise. RESULTS: After three months of moderate CT, older adults with T2DM showed improvements in fructosamine levels (partial η² = 0.07), indicating a medium effect size. Small effect sizes (partial η² ≈ 0.02-0.04) were observed in QoL domains related to physical, psychological, and environmental well-being. In cognitive function, a significant improvement was found in the abstraction domain (p = 0.031; partial η² = 0.12), with additional small effect sizes in delayed recall (partial η² = 0.04) and orientation (partial η² = 0.04) domains. CONCLUSION: There was a reduction in fructosamine levels and slightly improved QoL in physical, psychological, and environmental domains, with no change in HbA1c or aging-specific QoL. Cognitive function showed improvement in abstraction and small gains in recall and orientation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".