Effects of moderate aerobic exercise on elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment:a Meta analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the of moderate aerobic exercise on elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment（MCI）.MethodsRandomized controlled trials on effects of moderate aerobic exercise on elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment，were systematically retrieved from Web of Science，MedLine，PubMed，The Cochrane Library，Elsevier SDOL，EMbase，CNKI，Wanfang Data，and VIP.The retrieval period was from the establishment of databases to 22 April，2020.After literature screening，data extraction and quality evaluation，Review Manager 5.3 software was used for Meta analysis.ResultsA total of 12 randomized controlled trials were included.Meta⁃analysis results showed that compared with control group，the score of Montreal Cognitive Assessment［MD=1.61，95%CI（1.25，1.98），P<0.000 01］，the score of Mini⁃Mental State Examination［MD=0.78，95%CI（0.37，1.20），P=0.000 2］ and the score of Wechsler Memory Scale［MD=3.08，95%CI（1.77，4.39），P<0.000 01］ of experiment group had improved.ConclusionsExisting evidence shows that moderate aerobic exercise can effectively improve cognitive function of elderly patients with MCI，but more high⁃quality studies are needed to verify the research results.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".