NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
Exercise is a promising non-pharmacological intervention for motor and non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, direct comparisons between basic physical training (BPT) and dual-task training remain limited. The objective of the current clinical trial is to evaluate clinical and functional effects of BPT and a BPT combined with dual-task functional exercises (BPT + FE) in individuals with PD. In this randomized controlled trial, 24 participants with idiopathic PD were allocated to BPT, BPT + FE, or a no-intervention control group (Con). Interventions lasted 12 weeks (three 60-minute sessions/week). Outcomes included quality of life (PDQ-39), depressive symptoms (BDI), lower-limb strength (1-minute Sit-to-Stand Test, STS), and functional mobility (Timed Up and Go, TUG). Group effects were analyzed using permutation-based ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. Both interventions significantly improved physical performance vs. controls. STS gains were observed for BPT vs. Con (Mean Difference, MD = 31.00; p = .0026) and BPT + FE vs. Con (MD = 19.00; p = .0026). TUG times improved for BPT vs. Con (MD = -2.07s; p = .0039) and BPT + FE vs. Con (MD = -2.43s; p = .0028). Although BDI and PDQ-39 did not show statistically significant changes between group differences (r_rb = -0.429 and -0.339, respectively), several subscales demonstrated medium effect sizes suggesting potentially meaningful trends: emotional well-being (BPT: r_rb = -0.428; BPT + FE: r_rb = -0.446), bodily discomfort (BPT: r_rb = -0.524), and activities of daily living (BPT + FE: r_rb = -0.429). In conclusion, both programs improved physical performance in PD. Patient-reported outcomes did not reach statistical significance, but effect-size patterns suggest possible psychosocial benefits that warrant confirmation in larger trials. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05963425.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.