Sex Matters in the Association between Physical Activity and Fitness with Cognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The benefits from physical activity (PA) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) on normal age-related cognitive decline might be sex dependent. Our aim was to explore the relationship between different types of PA, CRF, and cognition and to identify the mediating effects of CRF in the association between PA and cognition in women and men. METHODS: We recruited 115 healthy adults 50-70 yr of age. We obtained demographic, cognitive, and PA status data based on the Projecte Moviment protocol. We calculated cognitive domains by grouping z-sample scores. We obtained self-reported total energy expenditure during the last month and grouped it into sportive PA (S-PA) and nonsportive PA (NS-PA). CRF was estimated using the Rockport 1-Mile Walk Test. We applied regression models and mediation analyses in a final sample of 104 individuals (65 women and 39 men). RESULTS: In the total sample, CRF was positively associated with executive function, verbal memory, and attention-speed. S-PA was positively related to executive function and attention-speed, whereas NS-PA was unrelated to cognitive domains. Greater amounts of S-PA were associated with executive function and attention-speed for both women and men. Higher CRF was associated with executive function, memory, language, and attention-speed only in men. Mediation analyses showed that CRF was a significant mediator of the positive effects of S-PA on executive function and attention-speed in men but not in women. CONCLUSIONS: Both women and men show cognitive benefits from greater S-PA, but not from NS-PA. However, there were sex differences in the mediating effects of CRF in this relationship, showing that CRF was mediating these benefits only in men.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".