SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
Comparative effects of different exercise modalities on cognitive domains in older adults: a Bayesian network meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effects of different exercise modalities on multiple cognitive domains in cognitively healthy older adults and examine associations between exercise dose parameters and cognitive benefits. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions in cognitively healthy older adults were systematically searched. Outcomes were classified into five domains: executive function, memory, verbal fluency, processing speed, and working memory. Random-effects pairwise meta-analyses were performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs). Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted by participant and intervention characteristics. Linear random-effects meta-regressions examined frequency, session duration, intervention length, weekly dose, and total dose as continuous moderators. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was applied to compare and rank exercise modalities, distinguishing active and PCs. Results: Pairwise meta-analyses showed significant improvements in executive function (SMD = 0.31, 95% CI 0.18-0.44), memory (SMD = 0.26, 95% CI 0.14-0.38), and processing speed (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI 0.12-0.38), a borderline effect for working memory (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI 0.00-0.39), and no significant effect for verbal fluency. Meta-regression showed positive associations of training frequency and weekly dose with executive function, and of training frequency with processing speed. Bayesian NMA suggested aerobic exercise (AE) ranked higher for executive function and memory, while mind-body exercise (MBE) showed potential advantages for verbal fluency and working memory; however, most between-modality comparisons remained inconclusive. Conclusion: Exercise benefits multiple cognitive domains in cognitively healthy older adults, with more consistent effects on executive function and memory. AE appears promising, but further high-quality head-to-head trials with long-term follow-up are warranted. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261290474, CRD420261290474.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.