↓ Skip to main content

The beneficial effects of different types of exercise interventions on motor and cognitive functions in older age: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
107 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The beneficial effects of different types of exercise interventions on motor and cognitive functions in older age: a systematic review
Published in
European Review of Aging and Physical Activity, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s11556-017-0189-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oron Levin, Yael Netz, Gal Ziv

Abstract

The decline in cognitive and motor functions with age affects the performance of the aging healthy population in many daily life activities. Physical activity appears to mitigate this decline or even improve motor and cognitive abilities in older adults. The current systematic review will focus mainly on behavioral studies that look into the dual effects of different types of physical training (e.g., balance training, aerobic training, strength training, group sports, etc.) on cognitive and motor tasks in older adults with no known cognitive or motor disabilities or disease. Our search retrieved a total of 1095 likely relevant articles, of which 41 were considered for full-text reading and 19 were included in the review after the full-text reading. Overall, observations from the 19 included studies conclude that improvements on both motor and cognitive functions were found, mainly in interventions that adopt physical-cognitive training or combined exercise training. While this finding advocates the use of multimodal exercise training paradigms or interventions to improve cognitive-motor abilities in older adults, the sizeable inconsistency among training protocols and endpoint measures complicates the generalization of this finding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 251 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 14%
Student > Master 31 12%
Researcher 28 11%
Student > Bachelor 21 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 7%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 79 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 40 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 10%
Neuroscience 23 9%
Psychology 21 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 5%
Other 35 14%
Unknown 96 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2018.
All research outputs
#6,075,342
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from European Review of Aging and Physical Activity
#54
of 176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,883
of 452,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Review of Aging and Physical Activity
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 176 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 452,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them