Synergic trial secondary outcomes results on gait and falls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) have higher risk of gait impairments and falls, yet the effects of multimodal interventions, including combinations of exercises with cognitive training, on improving their mobility remain unclear. Objectives To investigate the synergistic effects of aerobic-resistance exercise combined with cognitive training, with or without vitamin D supplementation, on gait performance and fall risk in older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Methods The effect of 20 weeks of aerobic-resistance exercise, cognitive training, and vitamin D supplementation (10,000 IU 3x/week) on gait and falls in older adults with MCI was evaluated in the SYNERGIC Trial, using a fractional factorial design. Results Among 161 participants, exercise-based arms (n = 4) improved gait speed (+7.5 cm/s, p < 0.001) and reduced injurious falls by 62% (IRR=0.38, p = 0.04). Exercise plus cognitive training showed the greatest gains in gait speed and reduced injurious falls (IRR=0.13, p = 0.05). Vitamin D did not enhance outcomes and increased gait instability. Conclusion Aerobic-resistance exercise combined with cognitive training improves gait performance and decreases the risk of injurious falls in older adults with MCI. The addition of vitamin D did not produce benefits.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".