A systematic review protocol for slow-paced breathing in healthy populations: Impacts on cognition and insights into mechanisms of action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Slow-paced breathing (SPB) has emerged as an intervention to improve cognitive function and prevent cognitive decline. The proposed systematic review aims to consolidate previous literature examining the impacts of SPB across cognitive subdomains when compared to passive and active controls in adults, as well as the mechanisms involved. METHODS: Literature searches will be conducted in MEDLINE(R) ALL, Embase Classic + Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL Ultimate, and Web of Science. Gray literature sources include preprints and clinical trial registries. Citation tracking will be used as a supplemental search method. RCTs, quasi-randomized trials, and non-randomized interventions with a control or comparison group focused on adult human participants will be included. Studies on pediatric populations or animals will be excluded. The primary outcomes are standardized cognitive test scores and test batteries. Data on the parameters of SPB protocols will also be collected to gain insight into the mechanisms driving observed cognitive changes. Two independent reviewers will blindly complete citation screening, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment using Covidence, and appraisal of study quality using GRADEpro. Risk of bias will be assessed for non-randomized controlled trials and RCTs using the ROBINS-I and RoB tools, respectively. A narrative synthesis of the findings will be conducted. Results will be stratified based on methodological features such as study design, population demographics, intervention parameters, and cognitive domain. If the data of the included literature permit, a meta-analysis will be performed to compare improvements by (i) cognitive domain, (ii) population demographics, and (iii) parameters of intervention protocols (e.g., duration of inhalation vs. exhalation). DISCUSSION: SPB is a promising intervention for conferring generalizable cognitive improvements. This review will consolidate early findings, give insight into SPB's efficacy as a clinical intervention, and lay the groundwork for future research into mechanisms and optimal parameters. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024615253.
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 | 0.113 | 0.146 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.015 |
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".