P2‐591: THE EFFECT OF INTENSITY AND DURATION OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ON COGNITION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) has been linked with marked improvements in cognition through its effect on brain-derived neurotrophic factor, cardiovascular health, and facilitation of social network creation that help older adults stimulate their cognition. We investigated the relationship between intensity of physical activity and its effect on cognition between older adults who are physically active with those who are not, using resting metabolic rates (METS) from the Minnesota Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire (MLTPAQ) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). We administered the MLTPAQ and MoCA in the NIH-funded Arizona Frailty Cohort of community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years. MLTPAQ assessed the frequency and duration of 18 physical activities two weeks prior to assessment. The corresponding resting metabolic equivalent (MET), frequency, intensity and duration of each activity were summed to obtain the total MET score for participants. MoCA assessed cognition with a cut off score of ≤25 (range: 0-30) to identify participants with mild cognitive impairment or dementia. The interquartile range for total MET scores was used to identify cut-offs for non-exercisers, moderate exercisers, and heavy-exercisers. A pairwise Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests with Bonferroni adjustment was performed in STATA to determine if there was a significant difference between the mean MoCA scores of the first and third interquartiles representing non-exercisers and exercisers. Of note, only one participant was represented in the fourth quartile, thus we choose to contrast the lowest and third quartiles. One-hundred-and-twenty-eight older adults (mean age: 79.5+7.8, range: 65-95) were assessed. 58 non-exerciser older adults were in the first interquartile (MET score: mean 1718.4); 30 (52%) of whom were cognitively impaired. Of 32 exerciser older adults in the third interquartile (MET score: mean 5387.5), 6 (19%) were cognitively impaired. Overall, there was a highly significant difference in MoCA scores between the first and third quartiles (Prob > z = 0.0008). Moderate exercisers had better cognition than did non-exercising participants. This relationship underscores the importance of exercising throughout aging in order to preserve cognitive function, along with the other physiological benefits. Older adults who do not routinely participate in physical activity may be at a higher risk for 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.003 |
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".