Time-restricted feeding and cognitive function in sedentary and physically active elderly individuals: Ramadan diurnal intermittent fasting as a model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives This study aimed to investigate the effects of Ramadan diurnal intermittent fasting (RDIF) on cognitive performance, sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, and insomnia in physically active and sedentary elderly individuals. Methods A total of 58 participants (62.93 ± 3.99 years) were assigned to one of the following two groups: a sedentary group (control group) who observed Ramadan ( n = 32) and a physically active group ( n = 26) who continued to train while observing Ramadan. Participants were assessed 2 weeks before Ramadan and during the fourth week of Ramadan. On each occasion, participants completed a digital assessment of their cognitive performance and responded to the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI), the insomnia severity index (ISI) and the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaires to assess sleep parameters. Results Compared to before Ramadan, performance in executive function ( p = 0.035), attention ( p = 0.005), inhibition ( p = 0.02), associative memory ( p = 0.041), and recognition memory ( p = 0.025) increased significantly during Ramadan in the physically active group. For the sedentary group, associative learning performance decreased ( p = 0.041), whilst performances in the remaining domains remained unchanged during Ramadan. Global PSQI, ISI, and ESS scores indicated both groups suffered from poor sleep quality and excessive daytime sleepiness, with significantly higher negative effects of RDIF observed in the sedentary group. Conclusion Older adults who continue to train at least three times per week during Ramadan may improve their cognitive performance, despite the impairment of sleep quality. Future studies in older adults during Ramadan including objective measures of sleep (e.g., polysomnography, actigraphy) and brain function (e.g., functional magnetic resonance imaging) are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".