The effect of exercise and soy protein intake on physical frailty score improvement in community-dwelling elderly: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of combined exercise and nutrition interventions on physical frailty in community-dwelling older adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 84 participants (68 women; mean age of 75.5 ± 6.3 years). Participants were assigned to either an exercise-only group or a combined exercise and nutrition group. The 3-month intervention included weekly 1-h exercise sessions (10 sessions total). Outcomes assessed were walking speed, limb skeletal muscle mass index, trunk muscle mass, grip strength, weight loss, fatigue, exercise habits, general cognitive function (Montreal Cognitive Assessment Japanese version, MoCA-J), and biochemical blood test data. RESULTS: Among the 84 participants, 77 (39 exercise-only, 38 exercise + nutrition group) were analyzed. Pre-post comparisons showed a main effect of physical frailty for both groups: 0.82 ± 0.79 pre-post and 0.51 ± 0.68 pre-intervention vs. post-intervention for the exercise group, and 0.82 ± 0.69 pre-post and 0.50 ± 0.60 post-post for the exercise+nutrition group. Walking speed was 1.27 ± 0.21 m/s pre and 1.29 ± 0.21 m/s post in the exercise group and 1.18 ± 0.19 m/s pre and 1.27 ± 0.19 m/s post in the exercise + nutrition group, showing a main effect and interaction effect. Other measures showed significant effects on limb skeletal muscle mass, trunk muscle mass, grip strength, and trunk muscle mass in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise intervention, with or without nutritional supplementation, significantly reduced physical frailty in older adults. Combining exercise with soy protein intake may improve short-term motor function and physical frailty.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".