MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164961529 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/6yc7t

Physical Fitness and Age-Related Differences in Cognition and Cortical Thickness in Young Adulthood

2020· preprint· en· W3164961529 on OpenAlexaff
John R. Best

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeritabilityCognitionTwin studyPsychologyAssociation (psychology)Young adultDizygotic twinsEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceDizygotic twinDevelopmental psychologyPhysical fitnessMedicineBiologyNeurosciencePhysical therapyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The association between physical fitness and age-related differences in cognition and brain structure has been studied fairly extensively during development and aging, yet comparatively less in young adulthood. The current study examined 1195 young adults aged 22 to 36 (54% female; 67% Caucasian) to better understand associations between physical fitness—grip strength and submaximal cardiovascular endurance—and age-related differences in executive function (EF), memory, and average cortical thickness. EF, memory, and cortical thickness were negatively associated with age, and higher endurance was positively associated with EF and memory. Neither physical fitness measure associated with cortical thinning. To follow-up on these analyses, data from monozygotic (n=149 pairs) and dizygotic (n=93 pairs) twins were used to estimate the degree to which heritability versus environment might contribute to the observed associations between cognition and endurance. Environmental effects shared by monozygotic and dizygotic twins alike were estimated to account for roughly 50% of the correlation between endurance and cognition (EF and memory). Heritability and non-shared environmental effects were inconsistent across EF and memory. Overall, these findings suggest an association between cardiovascular endurance and age-related differences in cognition in young adulthood and that these associations may be independent of cortical thinning. Whereas there was consistent evidence for a moderate contribution of the shared environment, there was limited and inconsistent evidence for a role of heritability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207