ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Distinct neural mechanisms underlying the effects of agility and resistance-aerobic training on executive function and gait in young adults.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Executive function (EF) is essential for daily functioning. While exercise enhances EF, the specific effects of different training types remain unclear. Agility training (AT), which integrates cognitive and motor demands, is a promising but understudied intervention. This study compared the effects of AT versus combined resistance-aerobic training (RAeT) on EF, dual-task walking, and their underlying neural mechanisms in healthy adults. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 26 healthy adults were assigned to either AT ( Results: AT and RAeT induced distinct behavioral and neural patterns. AT primarily enhanced executive function, significantly reducing Stroop incongruent response times (Pre: 1085.20 ms; Post: 907.96 ms; F/u: 843.00 ms; Pre-Post Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that AT and RAeT may improve cognitive-motor function through distinct neurophysiological mechanisms. AT optimized efficiency in reactive cognitive control, while RAeT enhanced efficiency in integrated cognitive-motor activities. Agility training is thus a flexible, practical, and cost-effective option for improving brain and cognitive function, especially in settings with limited equipment.
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.