The impact of adapted tango dance on cognitive and executive function in older adults: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a 12-week adapted tango program on executive and cognitive function in older adults. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, fifty Chinese older adults (aged 60-69 years) were randomly assigned to either an adapted tango intervention group (n = 25) or a control group (n = 25) maintaining usual daily habits. The intervention group completed a 12-week adapted tango program (twice weekly, 60 min per session). Executive function was assessed using the Flanker task, Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS) task, and N-back task, while global cognition was measured with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA was performed to examine group × time interactions, followed by Bonferroni-adjusted post-hoc comparisons. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d. RESULTS: Significant group × time interactions were found for Flanker reaction time (RT) and accuracy (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001), with improvements in the tango group but no changes in the control group. DCCS RT and accuracy also showed significant improvements (p < 0.001), while the control group exhibited no changes. Significant improvements were noted in N-back RT and accuracy (p = 0.008 and p < 0.001), with no changes observed in the control group. Additionally, MMSE total and subdomains (e.g., orientation) significantly improved (p < 0.001), with no changes in the controls. MoCA total and subdomains (e.g., visuospatial/executive) significantly improved (p < 0.001), while no changes were found in the control group. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that adapted tango may be an effective non-pharmacological intervention for enhancing executive and cognitive functions in older adults, with potential implications for promoting cognitive health in aging populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".