Frontiers in public health · 2026
Effects of AI-assisted wushu training on mental health, cognitive performance, and cardiovascular function in university students: a quasi-experimental study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yang Jiannan, Zhang Ziyin, Li Ziwu
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In this quasi-experimental study, we examined whether AI-assisted wushu (Chinese martial arts) routine training, delivered through camera-based immediate post-performance movement feedback, was associated with greater improvements in mental health, cognitive performance, and cardiovascular function than conventional wushu instruction among university students.
METHODS: A campus-based, two-group, quasi-experimental pre-post design with non-randomized allocation by course section was conducted over 6 weeks among 298 physical education undergraduates (n = 149 per group). Outcomes included perceived stress, anxiety, psychological well-being, and emotion regulation (mental health); Stroop, digit-span, n-back, and Trail-Making Test performance and a composite executive-function index (cognitive performance); and resting heart rate, blood pressure, heart-rate variability, vital capacity, and heart-rate recovery (cardiovascular function). Post-intervention group differences were modeled with ANCOVA adjusting for baseline scores, age, sex, and BMI; associations between movement-quality gain and outcome change were examined with Pearson correlation and covariate-adjusted bootstrapped mediation, with false discovery rate correction applied.
RESULTS: Groups did not differ significantly at baseline (all p > 0.07). Both groups improved on every outcome (all p < 0.001), and after adjustment the AI-assisted group showed somewhat larger gains, including for perceived stress (adjusted mean difference -1.20, 95% CI - 1.74 to -0.66), psychological well-being (+1.15, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.91), n-back accuracy (+2.37, 95% CI 1.59 to 3.15), the executive-function index (+0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.18), resting heart rate (-1.09 bpm, 95% CI - 1.58 to -0.60), and vital capacity (+51.6 mL, 95% CI 34.8 to 68.4; all p < 0.03, retained after FDR correction). Movement-quality gain correlated modestly with cognitive-affective but not cardiovascular improvement (r = 0.17-0.22, p < 0.01), and partially mediated group effects on emotion regulation and executive function.
CONCLUSION: These findings therefore support a multiple-pathway interpretation of the incremental AI-feedback effect rather than a single motor-skill mechanism. Given the non-randomized design, these associations are preliminary rather than definitive evidence of causal benefit; randomized, longer-term studies with appropriate active controls are needed to confirm mechanisms, durability, and generalizability.
METHODS: A campus-based, two-group, quasi-experimental pre-post design with non-randomized allocation by course section was conducted over 6 weeks among 298 physical education undergraduates (n = 149 per group). Outcomes included perceived stress, anxiety, psychological well-being, and emotion regulation (mental health); Stroop, digit-span, n-back, and Trail-Making Test performance and a composite executive-function index (cognitive performance); and resting heart rate, blood pressure, heart-rate variability, vital capacity, and heart-rate recovery (cardiovascular function). Post-intervention group differences were modeled with ANCOVA adjusting for baseline scores, age, sex, and BMI; associations between movement-quality gain and outcome change were examined with Pearson correlation and covariate-adjusted bootstrapped mediation, with false discovery rate correction applied.
RESULTS: Groups did not differ significantly at baseline (all p > 0.07). Both groups improved on every outcome (all p < 0.001), and after adjustment the AI-assisted group showed somewhat larger gains, including for perceived stress (adjusted mean difference -1.20, 95% CI - 1.74 to -0.66), psychological well-being (+1.15, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.91), n-back accuracy (+2.37, 95% CI 1.59 to 3.15), the executive-function index (+0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.18), resting heart rate (-1.09 bpm, 95% CI - 1.58 to -0.60), and vital capacity (+51.6 mL, 95% CI 34.8 to 68.4; all p < 0.03, retained after FDR correction). Movement-quality gain correlated modestly with cognitive-affective but not cardiovascular improvement (r = 0.17-0.22, p < 0.01), and partially mediated group effects on emotion regulation and executive function.
CONCLUSION: These findings therefore support a multiple-pathway interpretation of the incremental AI-feedback effect rather than a single motor-skill mechanism. Given the non-randomized design, these associations are preliminary rather than definitive evidence of causal benefit; randomized, longer-term studies with appropriate active controls are needed to confirm mechanisms, durability, and generalizability.