The Effects of a Pilates-Based Cognicise Program on Cognitive Ability and Physical Fitness in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is associated with reduced cognitive function and age-related decline in physical fitness, which increases dementia risk.Dual-task training, combining motor and cognitive tasks shows promise for improving functional capacity in older adults.This pilot study examined the effects of a Pilates-based cognicise program on cognition and physical fitness in older adults with MCI.Design: A Pilot study.Methods: Eleven community-dwelling older adults with MCI froma local dementia care center completed a 10-week Pilates-based cognicise intervention.Each session consisted of 60 minutes of Pilates exercise performed concurrently with cognitive tasks.The Montreal cognitive assessment-Koreanversion (MoCA-K) assessed cognitive function, and senior fitness test evaluated physical fitness.Pre-and post-intervention scores were compared to determine the effects of the program.Results: MoCA-K scores significantly increased after the intervention (from 11.64 to 14.18, p<0.05).Significant improvements were also found in lower-body strength as measured by the 30-second chair stand test (from 9.36 to 11.87 repetitions, p<0.05), and in upper-body strength as measured by the arm curl test (from 12.72 to 14.84 repetitions, p<0.05).2-minute step test, 8-foot up-and-go, chair sit-and-reach, and back scratch test showed no significant changes.Conclusions: A Pilates-based cognicise program improved cognitive function and muscular strength in older adults with MCI.Dual-task Pilates exercise may be a feasible intervention for enhancing brain health and functional capacity in this population, warranting larger trials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".