Cardiovascular exercise enhances motor learning across multiple sessions in people with Parkinson’s disease: a randomized controlled pilot trial
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motor learning is critical for effective motor rehabilitation, yet impaired in people with Parkinson's Disease (pwPD). Emerging evidence suggests that cardiovascular exercise (CVE), performed close to skill practice, may promote brain plasticity and motor learning. However, research has predominantly focused on acute effects of a single CVE session in neurotypical individuals. Here, we examined whether post-practice CVE enhances motor learning over multiple weeks. Twenty-four pwPD were randomly assigned to either moderate-intensity cycling or seated rest after practicing a novel balance task across six sessions. As hypothesized, CVE significantly improved motor learning, particularly in sessions 4 and 5. This effect was reflected in a non-significant trend toward greater within-session online learning, rather than in between-session offline gains. Exploratory analyses indicate that individuals with higher cardiorespiratory fitness benefited most from CVE. Our findings highlight CVE as an effective, low-cost tool to foster motor learning in neurorehabilitation and warrant further investigation.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it