Sex differences in the relationship between cardiorespiratory fitness and brain function in older adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated sex differences in the association between a measure of physical health, cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), and brain function using resting-state functional connectivity fMRI. We examined these sex differences in the default, frontoparietal control, and cingulo-opercular networks, assemblies of functionally connected brain regions known to be impacted by both age and fitness level. Healthy older adults ( n = 49; 29 women) were scanned to obtain measures of intrinsic connectivity within and across these 3 networks. We calculated global efficiency (a measure of network integration) and local efficiency (a measure of network specialization) using graph theoretical methods. Across all three networks combined, local efficiency was positively associated with CRF, and this was more robust in male versus female older adults. Furthermore, global efficiency was negatively associated with CRF, but only in males. Our findings suggest that in older adults, associations between brain network integrity and physical health are sex-dependent. These results underscore the importance of considering sex differences when examining associations between fitness and brain function in older adulthood. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and resting state functional connectivity in several brain networks known to be impacted by age and fitness level. We found significant associations between fitness and measures of network integration and network specialization, but in a sex-dependent manner, highlighting the interplay between sex differences, fitness, and aging brain health. Our findings underscore the importance of considering sex differences when examining associations between fitness and brain function in older adulthood.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".