ReviewJournal of Intelligence2026
Effects of Traditional and Technology-Based Exercise Interventions on Cognitive Function in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of Intelligence, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs population aging accelerates, pharmacological treatments provide limited benefits for cognitive decline. Exercise and technology-assisted exercise have thus emerged as important non-pharmacological approaches for supporting cognitive health in older adults. However, comparative evidence on the relative effectiveness of different intervention modalities across cognitive outcomes remains limited.
objectiveThis study used a network meta-analysis to systematically compare and rank the effects of traditional and non-traditional exercise interventions on cognitive function in older adults.
methodsThis systematic review and network meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD420261278685). PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to May 2026. Randomized controlled trials enrolling participants aged 60 years or older were included. Interventions comprised aerobic, resistance, mind-body, finger, and multicomponent exercise, as well as virtual reality-based interventions, artificial intelligence-assisted exercise, and wearable exoskeleton training. Primary outcomes included global cognition, executive function, memory, attention, and activities of daily living. A random effects network meta-analysis was applied to estimate standardized mean differences with 95 percent confidence intervals, and intervention rankings were derived using SUCRA values.
resultsA total of 70 randomized controlled trials involving 5573 older adults were included. All active interventions demonstrated overall cognitive benefits compared with usual care or non-active control conditions. Mind-body exercise showed the highest probability of improving global cognitive performance. Virtual reality-based interventions were particularly effective for executive function, memory, and activities of daily living, while artificial intelligence-assisted exercise showed favorable rankings for attention outcomes. Mind-body exercise showed favorable effects on global cognition, whereas several technology-assisted interventions ranked highly for selected cognitive and functional outcomes.
conclusionsBoth traditional and non non-traditional exercise interventions improve cognitive function in older adults, although their effects differ across cognitive domains. Technology-assisted approaches appear more effective for enhancing specific cognitive functions, while traditional interventions such as mind-body exercise are more advantageous for preserving overall cognitive performance. These findings highlight the potential value of stage specific and combined intervention strategies for promoting cognitive health in aging populations.
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.