Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 31;10:12906. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69560-4

Table 3.

Neuropsychological tests in the groups during the intervention.

Group Baseline 24 weeks Change (Δ) r Δ adjusted r
Attention
  Selective
    Stroop CW step 1 no Ex + placebo 52.9 ± 1.7 53.1 ± 1.9 0.2 ± 1.1 1.0 ± 1.5
Ex + placebo 51.3 ± 1.7 54.3 ± 1.7** 3.1 ± 0.9 0.25 3.3 ± 1.5 0.24
Ex + LCPUFA 45.8 ± 2.7 50.8 ± 2.7 5.0 ± 2.7 0.25 3.7 ± 1.7 0.13
    Stroop CW step 3 no Ex + placebo 35.4 ± 1.2 36.0 ± 1.2 0.6 ± 0.5 1.1 ± 1.0
Ex + placebo 35.1 ± 1.4 35.7 ± 1.4 0.6 ± 0.7 0.01 0.9 ± 1.0 0.01
Ex + LCPUFA 29.8 ± 1.7 33.2 ± 1.9 3.4 ± 2.1 0.21 2.3 ± 1.2 0.07
  Selective/divided
    TMT-A no Ex + placebo 32.3 ± 2.3 32.6 ± 2.1 0.2 ± 2.1 − -1.0 ± 1.9
Ex + placebo 32.2 ± 1.6 29.9 ± 1.6 − 2.4 ± 1.2 0.15 − 3.7 ± 2.0 0.17
Ex + LCPUFA 38.8 ± 4.6 32.2 ± 2.9 − 6.6 ± 5.1 0.20 − 3.2 ± 2.3 0.08
  Divided
    TMT-B no Ex + placebo 74.9 ± 4.7 75.1 ± 4.8 0.2 ± 4.4 - − 0.3 ± 4.1
Ex + placebo 74.3 ± 5.1 67.9 ± 3.6* − 6.4 ± 2.6 0.17 − 7.1 ± 4.2 0.21
Ex + LCPUFA 80.5 ± 5.5 73.9 ± 8.2 − 6.6 ± 6.9 0.13 − 5.1 ± 4.8 0.10
Working memory
  Digit span no Ex + placebo 12.7 ± 0.7 13.3 ± 0.8 0.6 ± 0.5 - 0.7 ± 0.5
Ex + placebo 11.1 ± 0.6 12.0 ± 0.7* 0.9 ± 0.4 0.07 0.7 ± 0.5 0.05
Ex + LCPUFA 11.9 ± 1.0 13.2 ± 1.0 1.3 ± 0.8 0.12 1.3 ± 0.6 0.10
Executive function
  Inhibitory control
    Stroop CW step 2 no Ex + placebo 43.6 ± 1.8 45.3 ± 1.9 1.7 ± 1.2 2.2 ± 1.5
Ex + placebo 44.0 ± 1.6 47.7 ± 1.7** 3.6 ± 1.3 0.15 4.3 ± 1.5 0.17
Ex + LCPUFA 38.4 ± 2.8 43.0 ± 2.4 4.6 ± 2.8 0.15 3.1 ± 1.7 0.04
    Stroop CW step 4 no Ex + placebo 27.5 ± 2.1 29.5 ± 2.0 2.0 ± 1.4 2.1 ± 1.4
Ex + placebo 28.3 ± 2.2 30.4 ± 2.0 2.1 ± 1.4 0.01 2.4 ± 1.4 0.02
Ex + LCPUFA 25.8 ± 2.4 28.7 ± 2.0 2.9 ± 2.2 0.05 2.4 ± 1.6 0.01
  Cognitive flexibility
    KWCST CA no Ex + placebo 3.4 ± 0.4 3.2 ± 0.4 − 0.2 ± 0.3 − 0.1 ± 0.3
Ex + placebo 3.0 ± 0.4 3.2 ± 0.4 0.3 ± 0.4 0.12 0.2 ± 0.3 0.09
Ex + LCPUFA 3.3 ± 0.5 3.5 ± 0.4 0.1 ± 0.4 0.10 0.2 ± 0.4 0.11
  Language flexibility
    Verbal fluency no Ex + placebo 70.6 ± 2.3 72.5 ± 2.7 1.9 ± 1.8 1.6 ± 2.0
Ex + placebo 70.9 ± 3.3 73.3 ± 3.2 2.4 ± 2.2 0.02 2.1 ± 2.0 0.03
Ex + LCPUFA 76.0 ± 4.3 79.5 ± 4.4 3.6 ± 2.5 0.08 4.3 ± 2.3 0.12
Episodic memory
  Verbal immediate
    WMS-R LM I no Ex + placebo 19.1 ± 1.0 21.1 ± 1.1* 2.0 ± 0.9 2.0 ± 1.0
Ex + placebo 19.0 ± 1.0 21.0 ± 0.8* 2.1 ± 0.9 0.01 2.0 ± 1.1 0.00
Ex + LCPUFA 19.0 ± 1.3 22.6 ± 2.0 3.6 ± 1.8 0.12 3.6 ± 1.2 0.13
  Verbal delayed
    WMS-R LM II no Ex + placebo 13.1 ± 0.8 17.3 ± 1.0** 4.2 ± 0.8 4.1 ± 1.0
Ex + placebo 13.4 ± 1.1 16.3 ± 1.0** 3.0 ± 0.9 0.14 3.0 ± 1.1 0.14
Ex + LCPUFA 13.4 ± 1.1 18.0 ± 2.1* 4.6 ± 1.7 0.03 4.6 ± 1.2 0.04
  Visual delayed
    ROCFT recall no Ex + placebo 14.8 ± 0.9 17.4 ± 1.1* 2.6 ± 1.2 2.4 ± 1.0
Ex + placebo 14.0 ± 1.5 15.1 ± 1.2 1.2 ± 1.1 0.12 0.7 ± 1.0 0.18
Ex + LCPUFA 17.6 ± 1.4 17.0 ± 1.5 − 0.6 ± 1.0 0.28 0.3 ± 1.1 0.21

Mean ± SE. no Ex + placebo (n = 28), Ex + placebo (n = 27) and Ex + LCPUFA (n = 21) groups.

There were significant differences in Stroop CW step 1 (p = 0.044) and step 3 (p = 0.014) at baseline among the groups. (one-way ANOVA). *p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01 vs. baseline (paired t-test). There was no significant difference in change (Δ) and change adjusted by baseline (Δ adjusted) between the either Ex groups and the no Ex + placebo (Dunnett's). Ex, exercise; LCPUFA, long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids; Stroop CW, Stroop Colour-Word; TMT, Trail making test; KWCST CA, Wisconsin card sorting test of Keio version category achieved; WMS-R LM I/II, Wechsler memory scale revised logical memory I/II; ROCFT, Rey–Osterrieth complex figure test. Effect size is expressed as r.