Assessment of a Cognitive-Motor Training Program in Adults at Increased Risk for Developing Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the prevalence of dementia increasing each year, preclinically implemented therapeutic interventions are critically needed. It has been suggested that cascading neural network failures may bring on behavioural deficits associated with Alzheimers disease. Previously we have shown that cognitive-motor integration (CMI) training in adults with mild cognitive impairments generalized to improved global cognitive and activities of daily living scores. Here we employ a novel movement-control based training approach involving CMI rather than traditional cognition-only brain training. We hypothesized that such training would stimulate widespread neural networks and enhance rule-based visuomotor ability in at-risk individuals. We observed a significant improvement in bimanual coordination in the at-risk training group. We also observed significant decreases in movement variability for the most complex CMI condition in the at-risk and healthy training groups. These data suggest that integrating cognition into action in a training intervention may be effective at strengthening vulnerable brain networks in asymptomatic adults at risk for developing dementia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".