Results
phonological VF
A total of 57 older adults were recruited. In total, 27 participants were excluded according to the eligibility criteria, and 28 were randomly allocated into the AT and AT + CT groups. Twelve participants were excluded from the analysis: four had <90% adherence to the training sessions, and we had eight dropouts. Hence, 16 subjects were included in the study and completed the training program (Study flowchart: AT, agility training; AT + CT, AT combined with cognitive training.There were no significant differences between groups in the baseline characteristics, as shown in Baseline comparison of both groups characteristics.AT, Agility training; BMI, body mass index; CT, Cognitive training; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination.AT + CT improved the scores of TUG-cog, phonological VF, and SPMT, whereas AT had better scores in SPMT after the training. Only for TUG-cog, ANOVA showed time x group interaction (Effects of AT and AT+CT on cognitive functions and comparison between groups.Main effect of time (Main effect of group. AT, Agility training; CT, Cognitive training; ES, effect size; SPMT, Scenery Picture Memory Test; TMT-A, Trail Making Test A; TMT-B, Trail Making Test B; SVF, semantic verbal fluency; PVF, phonological verbal fluency.The effects of AT + CT and AT on physical performance are shown in Effects of AT and AT+CT on physical function.Main effect of time (There was a significant correlation between IAT scores and VFP (Pearson's correlation between the Illinois agility test and phonological 