Aerobic Exercise Training Improves Cerebral Blood Flow and Executive Function: A Randomized, Controlled Cross-Over Trial in Sedentary Older Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Physical activity may attenuate age-related cognitive decline by improving cerebrovascular function. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate effects of aerobic exercise training on cerebral blood flow (CBF), which is a sensitive physiological marker of cerebrovascular function, in sedentary older men. Methods Seventeen apparently healthy men, aged 60-70 years and with a BMI between 25 and 35 kg/m2, were included in a randomized, controlled cross-over trial. Study participants were randomly allocated to a fully-supervised, progressive, aerobic exercise training or no-exercise control period for eight weeks, separated by a 12-week wash-out period. Measurements at the end of each period included aerobic fitness evaluated using peak oxygen consumption during incremental exercise (VO2peak), CBF measured with pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging, and post-load glucose responses determined using an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Furthermore, cognitive performance was assessed in the domains of executive function, memory, and psychomotor speed. Results VO2peak significantly increased following aerobic exercise training compared to no-exercise control by 262 ± 236 mL (P < 0.001). CBF was increased by 27% bilaterally in the frontal lobe, particularly the subcallosal and anterior cingulate gyrus (cluster volume: 1008mm3; P < 0.05), while CBF was reduced by 19% in the right medial temporal lobe, mainly temporal fusiform gyrus (cluster volume: 408mm3; P < 0.05). Mean post-load glucose concentrations determined using an OGTT decreased by 0.33 ± 0.63 mmol/L (P = 0.049). Furthermore, executive function improved as the latency of response was reduced by 5% (P = 0.034), but no changes were observed in memory or psychomotor speed. Conclusion Aerobic exercise training improves regional CBF in sedentary older men. These changes in CBF may underlie exercise-induced beneficial effects on executive function, which could be partly mediated by improvements in glucose metabolism. This clinical trial is registered on clinicaltrials.org as NCT03272061 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03272061).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".