Age differences in the moderating effects of neighbourhood disadvantage on the relationship between physical activity and cognitive function: A longitudinal analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore whether the association between physical activity (PA) and cognition is moderated by neighbourhood disadvantage, and whether this relationship varies with age. STUDY DESIGN: A longitudinal analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging, wherein we included participants (N = 41,599) from urban areas who did not change their residential postal code from baseline (2010-2015) to first follow-up (2015-2018). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At baseline, we measured PA using the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly, and neighbourhood disadvantage using the Material and Social Deprivation Indices. RESULTS: Using latent change score regression models, we determined that higher PA at baseline was independently associated with greater maintenance in memory performance from baseline to first follow-up both for adults aged 45-64 (B = 0.04, SE = 0.01, p = 0.001) and for those aged 65+ years (B = 0.12, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001). For participants aged 45-64 years, greater material deprivation was independently associated with declines in memory performance (B = -0.10, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001). In addition, greater social deprivation was associated with a stronger effect of PA on changes in executive functions (B = 0.17, SE = 0.08, p = 0.025) for adults aged 45-64 years; greater material deprivation was associated with a stronger effect of PA on changes in memory performance (B = 0.07, SE = 0.03, p = 0.022). We failed to detect any interactions between PA and neighbourhood disadvantage among adults aged 65+ years (all p values >0.05). CONCLUSION: For middle-aged adults, the benefits of PA on cognitive performance may be strongest among adults living with greater neighbourhood social and material disadvantages. For older adults, PA may be beneficial to cognitive performance irrespective of neighbourhood disadvantages.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".