MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596241949 · doi:10.1093/gerona/glx043

Larger Lateral Prefrontal Cortex Volume Predicts Better Exercise Adherence Among Older Women: Evidence From Two Exercise Training Studies

2017· article· en· W2596241949 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Best, Bryan K. Chiu, Peter A. Hall, Teresa Liu‐Ambrose

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrefrontal cortexPsychologyAttendanceAnterior cingulate cortexMedicineCognitionAudiologyInternal medicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent research has suggested an important role of lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC) in consistent implementation of positive health behaviors and avoidance of negative health behaviors. METHODS: We examined whether gray matter volume in the lPFC prospectively predicts exercise class attendance among older women (n = 122) who underwent either a 52-week or 26-week exercise training intervention. Structural magnetic resonance imaging determined gray matter volume at baseline. RESULTS: Independent of intracranial volume, age, education, body composition, mobility, depressive symptoms, and general cognitive functioning, larger lPFC volume predicted greater exercise class attendance (all p values < .05). Follow-up whole-brain analyses further confirmed that regions in the lPFC-especially the left middle frontal gyrus (p < .005)-predicted future exercise adherence as well as identified other regions, especially in the insula and temporal cortex, that predicted exercise adherence. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that sustained engagement in exercise training might rely in part on functions of the lPFC and that lPFC volume might be a reasonable proxy for such functions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.277
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.141 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207