Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2026
Incorporated vs Additional Dual-Task Training in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.
Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 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
Background: Aging involves declines in cognitive and physical functions, raising risks of falls, loss of independence, and poorer quality of life. Dual-task training, integrating cognitive and motor activities, has shown benefits, but direct comparisons of additional dual-task training (ADT), which embeds cognitive demands within motor tasks, and incorporated dual-task training (IDT), which requires concurrent yet independent cognitive tasks, are limited. Purpose: This study compared the effects of ADT and IDT on cognitive function, physical performance, instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), and quality of life in community-dwelling older adults. Patients and Methods: Seventy-four participants (≥60 years) were randomized to ADT (n = 34) or IDT (n = 40) and completed a 12-week group program. Cognitive outcomes were measured with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, Wechsler Memory Scale-III Word List, and Stroop Color Word Test; motor outcomes with the Box and Block Test, Timed Up and Go, and dual-task indices (BBT-SST, BBT-FD); functional outcomes with the Lawton IADL and Community Integration Questionnaire (CIQ). Results: A significant group × time effect was found for BBT-SST number scores ( Conclusion: IDT showed superior benefits for dual-task cognition and coordination, suggesting greater ecological validity, more efficient resource allocation, and closer alignment with real-world demands. Future studies should investigate electroencephalography (EEG) based neural mechanisms and develop VR approaches for at-risk older adults.
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.