MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390192525 · doi:10.1002/alz.080646

The temporal relationship between physical activity, mood, and sleep in older adults via a lead‐lag analysis

2023· article· en· W4390192525 on OpenAlexaff
Adrián Noriega de la Colina, Meishan Ai, Shania Fock Ka Bao, Arthur F. Kramer, Maiya R. Geddes

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsAlzheimer Society of CanadaMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodSittingPsychologyPhysical activitySleep (system call)Clinical psychologyMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Physical Activity, sleep, and mood are key modifiable lifestyle behaviours that are individually associated with lower cognitive decline [1]. Prior research suggests there may be a tridirectionally relationship among these three behaviours. The temporal relationship among these behaviours is unknown. Using an Ecological Momentary Assessment (ECA) and a time series analysis we aim to understand the temporal and longitudinal relationship among these factors. Method We performed a 10‐day lead‐lag analysis using Moderate‐to‐Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) and sleep as measured by a 24‐hour wrist‐worn accelerometer, and a self‐assessed daily mood scale on 30 community dwelling older adults who participated in a behavioural study to enhance physical activity in sedentary individuals (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04315363). Participants were included if they did not exercise more than 150 minutes of MVPA per week (International Physical Activity Questionnaire) and were sitting more than 8 hours per day (Marshall Sitting Questionnaire). We examine each variable separately for auto‐correlative relationships for different timepoints of the same variable. The temporal dynamics are calculated from the rank‐order of the lead‐lag coefficients. The relationships between different timepoints of mood, MVPA, and sleep are examined through cross‐correlations. Results Autocorrelations showed that mood presented seasonality with baseline mood positively correlated to the subsequent day’s mood (r = +.571, p = .037) and negatively correlated with mood at day 7 (r = ‐.330, p = 0.27) and day 8 (r = ‐.248, p = .013). The temporal dynamics identified mood (B = +.602), preceding MVPA time (B = ‐.001), and sleep time (B = ‐.276) (Figure 1). Furthermore, cross‐correlations demonstrated that mood was positively correlated to MVPA at the same time point (r = ‐.605) and also that previous day mood predicted next day’s MVPA (r = ‐.629). Cross‐correlations confirmed that MVPA (r = ‐.507) and mood (r = ‐.504) predicted next day’s sleep time. Conclusion Improved mood precedes the increase in MVPA and sleep time in sedentary older adults. Understanding temporal dynamics between mood, sleep time, and MVPA, can help develop better interventions targeting increase in physical activity in older adults. Reference: [1] 2020 Report of the Lancet Commission. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140‐6736(20)30367‐6.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→