Associations between physical activity, sedentary behaviour and cognitive domain performance of people living with mild cognitive impairment in the community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Physical activity is known to positively influence cognitive performance. For adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), the relationship between physical activity levels and cognitive performance is unknown. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine if cognitive performance [as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)] of people living in the community with MCI is associated with their physical activity levels or sedentary behaviour. METHODS: ActivPAL™ accelerometers were used to objectively measure physical activity and sedentary behaviour for seven full days. Cognitive performance was measured using the MoCA. CONSUMER AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: No involvement other than as research participants RESULTS: Eighty-two participants from the Balance on the Brain randomised controlled trial were included. Most participants were retired (88%), with 33 (40%) reporting a fall in the last year. The median MoCA score was 24 (IQR 22-26). Participants achieved a mean of 6296 (±2420) steps per day and were sedentary for 10.6 (±2) hours per day. The only physical activity outcomes that had a fair, positive correlation were moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity measures of total stepping time and total number of steps (with a cadence of ≥100 steps/min) with the orientation MoCA domain score (r(82) = 0.36, p ≤ 0.001 and r(82) = 0.37, p ≤ 0.001, respectively). Higher total sedentary time had a weak, positive correlation with better visuospatial/executive performance (r(82) = 0.23, p = 0.041). The orientation outcomes remained significant when analysed in an adjusted logistic regression model. CONCLUSION: This study found that performance in the MoCA orientation domain had a fair-positive correlation with moderate-intensity physical activity (i.e., stepping time and step count with a cadence of ≥100 steps/min) as measured by a thigh-worn accelerometer for community-dwelling older adults with MCI. When considering the relationship between cognitive domains and sedentary behaviour, consideration may be needed regarding whether cognitive enhancing activities (such as crosswords and other brain games) are being performed, which may confound this relationship. Further investigation is required to confirm these results.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".