MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2615220895

Examining the association between physical fitness, executive function, and memory

2014· article· en· W2615220895 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hanna Fang, Ilana B. Clark, Jennifer J. Heisz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPsychologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentDiseaseExecutive functionsPopulationAssociation (psychology)Episodic memoryGerontologyMemory impairmentMedicineNeuroscienceCognitive impairmentEnvironmental healthInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the aging population increases, neurodegenerative diseases present a growing threat. One such threat is Alzheimer’s disease, as it causes the deterioration of memory and the loss of independence. It is paramount to identify protective mechanisms that prevent or delay the onset of the disease. Physical activity may help to preserve aspects of cognitive function that decline with age and reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s disease. However, the underlying mechanism through which physical activity reduces the risk of Alzheimer’s disease is unknown. Although older adults who are more physically fit have better executive function, memory performance is unrelated to their physical fitness. This suggests that physical activity may not directly support memory to reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Instead, physical fitness may reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s disease by improving executive function, which may compensate for memory loss and artificially increase older adults’ beliefs about their memory ability. To examine the potential link between physical fitness, executive function and memory belief, we separated healthy older adults based on their score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a screening tool used to detect early signs of cognitive decline. As expected, older adults who passed the MoCA had better memory performance than those who failed. Furthermore, those who passed the MoCA had beliefs about their memory ability that mirrored their actual memory performance. However, the memory ability beliefs of those who failed the MoCA were unrelated to their actual memory performance; instead positive beliefs about their memory were related to better executive function performance and higher physical fitness. The results demonstrate the dissociation between the beliefs about memory ability and the actual memory ability of older adults with cognitive decline. The findings also reveal a novel association between physical fitness, executive function, and memory belief for individuals with cognitive impairment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAging and Gerontology Research→French-language works237,207→