MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398199927 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0303785

Orienteering combines vigorous-intensity exercise with navigation to improve human cognition and increase brain-derived neurotrophic factor

2024· article· en· W4398199927 on OpenAlexafffund
Emma E. Waddington, David J. Allison, Emilie M. Calabrese, Cara Pekos, Adrienne Lee, Jeremy J. Walsh, Jennifer J. Heisz

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOrienteeringHeart rateCognitionExercise intensityBrain-derived neurotrophic factorMedicineAerobic exercisePhysical therapyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performancePhysical medicine and rehabilitationRating of perceived exertionPsychologyAudiologyNeurotrophic factorsInternal medicineBlood pressurePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exercise enhances aspects of human cognition, but its intensity may matter. Recent animal research suggests that vigorous exercise, which releases greater amounts of lactate, activates more brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in the hippocampus and, thus, may be optimal for supporting cognitive function. The cognitive benefits of exercise may be further augmented when combined with cognitive training. The sport of orienteering simultaneously combines exercise with spatial navigation and, therefore, may result in greater cognitive benefits than exercising only, especially at vigorous intensities. The present study aimed to examine the effects of an acute bout of orienteering at different intensities on cognition and BDNF compared to exercising only. We hypothesized that vigorous-intensity orienteering would increase lactate and BDNF and improve cognition more than moderate-intensity orienteering or vigorous exercise alone. Sixty-three recreationally active, healthy young adults (Mage = 21.10±2.75 years) with no orienteering experience completed a 1.3 km intervention course by navigating and exercising at a vigorous (80-85% of heart rate reserve) or moderate (40-50% of heart rate reserve) intensity or exercising vigorously without navigation. Exercise intensity was monitored using peak lactate, heart rate and rating of perceived exertion. Serum BDNF was extracted immediately before and after the intervention. Memory was assessed using the Mnemonic Similarity Task (high-interference memory) and the Groton Maze Learning Test (spatial memory). Both exercising and orienteering at a vigorous intensity elicited greater peak lactate and increases in BDNF than moderate-intensity orienteering, and individuals with higher peak lactate also had greater increases in BDNF. High-interference memory improved after both vigorous-intensity interventions but did not improve after the moderate-intensity intervention. Spatial memory only increased after vigorous-intensity orienteering, suggesting that orienteering at a vigorous intensity may particularly benefit spatial cognition. Overall, the results demonstrate the benefits of vigorous exercise on human cognition and BDNF.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207