MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116841408 · doi:10.1002/alz70860_102757

Reshaping the path of mild cognitive impairment by refining exercise prescription: A trial designed to understand the type of exercise, for whom, and how

2025· article· en· W7116841408 on OpenAlexaffabout
Teresa Liu‐Ambrose

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionCognitive impairmentPath (computing)Cognitive trainingPhysical exerciseTraining (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Targeted exercise training is a promising strategy for promoting cognitive function and preventing dementia in older age. Despite the utility of exercise as an intervention, variation still exists in exercise-induced cognitive gains and questions remain regarding the type of training (i.e., what), as well as moderators (i.e., for whom) and mechanisms (i.e., how) of benefit. Both aerobic training (AT) and resistance training (RT) enhance cognitive function in older adults without cognitive impairment; however, the vast majority of trials have focused exclusively on AT. Thus, more research is needed on RT, as well as on the combination of AT and RT, in older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a prodromal stage for dementia. Therefore, we conducted a 6-month, 2x2 factorial randomized controlled trial in older adults with MCI to assess the individual effects of AT and RT, as well as the combined effect of AT and RT on cognitive function and to determine the possible underlying biological mechanisms. METHODS: 226 community-dwelling adults, aged 65 to 85 years, with MCI from metropolitan Vancouver were recruited to participate in this study. Randomization was stratified by biological sex and participants were randomly allocated to one of the four experimental groups: 1) 4x/week balance and tone (BAT; i.e., active control); 2) combined 2x/week AT + 2x/week RT; 3) 2x/week AT + 2x/week BAT; or 4) 2x/week RT + 2x/week BAT. The primary outcome was Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive-Plus. Secondary outcomes included cognitive function, health related quality of life, physical function, actigraphy measures, questionnaires, and falls. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 6 months (i.e., trial completion), and 18 months (i.e., 12-month follow-up). DISCUSSION: Establishing the efficacy of different types and combinations of exercise training to minimize cognitive decline will advance our ability to prescribe exercise as "medicine" to treat MCI and delay the onset and progression of dementia. This trial provides insight as to type of exercise training (what) may be most beneficial for MCI, for whom (i.e., sex differences) with MCI, and how.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→