ReviewCureus2026
Mapping Evidence on the Effectiveness of Mind-Body Interventions and Brain Gym on Cognitive Function in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing prevalence of dementia and age-related decline in cognitive function poses significant public health challenges. Brain Gym exercises and mind-body practices (MBPs), which are nonpharmacological interventions, enhance cognitive reserve and neuroplasticity through integrated breathing, meditative, and physical elements; however, in older adults with cognitive impairment, the evidence remains fragmented. Hence, this scoping review maps the evidence in older adults regarding the effectiveness of Brain Gym and MBPs for improving cognitive function, compares outcomes with conventional or no interventions, assesses feasibility and safety, and identifies research gaps while outlining recommendations. A comprehensive search of PubMed and ScienceDirect (January 2020 to December 2025) identified English-language, full-text original research on MBPs versus comparators in community-dwelling or institutionalized adults. Five reviewers screened records, extracted data on study characteristics, interventions, and findings, and appraised quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A narrative synthesis approach was utilized to present the results. Eleven high-quality studies (n = 19-585; 2020-2025), primarily randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in community settings across Asia, the US, Mexico, and Indonesia, were included. MBPs improved global cognition, memory quotients, executive function, and attention compared with usual care, with mixed superiority over aerobic comparators; Brain Gym enhanced brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels and domain-specific scores. Feasibility was high (81%-100% adherence, 89%-97% retention, no serious adverse events). Neuroimaging revealed gray matter increases in temporal and frontal regions and reduced inflammation. Gaps included short follow-up periods, limited virtual delivery, underrepresentation of frail subgroups, and limited mechanistic depth. Thus, MBPs and Brain Gym demonstrate accessible and promising cognitive benefits via neuroplastic mechanisms, outperforming controls in feasibility and domain-specific gains. Multicenter, long-term studies with diverse, high-risk cohorts and hybrid modalities are essential to refine protocols, address equity, and support integration into geriatric care for dementia prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.