Lifestyle, Physical Activity and Cognitive Functions: the impact on the scores of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCa)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a rapid screening tool, including subtests to assess several cognitive domains, developed to detect MCI from normal ageing cognitive changes. Several validation and normative studies have conducted around the world considering the influences of age and education on the MoCA score, but none takes into account the lifestyle and habits. However, lifestyles, and particularly physical activity (PA) have been positively associated with both physical and mental health in elderly. The aim of the present study is to investigate the influence of regularly practiced PA on the MoCA scores in a sample of Italian healthy elderly males. For this purpose sixty-five healthy adult males, aged 65-81 years were assigned to two groups, physically active group (PAG, N=33), and sedentary group (SG, N=32), according to recommended levels of physical activity by the World Health Organization. The Italian version of MoCA was administered to each participant. Raw data were analysed by a multiple regression model in which the independent variables were PA, age and education. Results showed a highly significant influence of PA on MoCA total score and on several cognitive domain sub-scores. Furthermore, multiple regression analysis indicated a larger impact on scores by PA than both age and education. In the light of these findings, it is advisable to pay attention to the life style of subject that undergoing a neuropsychological evaluation like the MoCa and in particular the level of PA practiced, as well as age and education.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".