Role of Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Aerobic, Exercise and Sports Participation in Female Cognition: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) on cognition is thought to be mediated by brain-derived neurotrophic factor. Aerobic exercise can increase CRF through various activities, including sports participation. The relationship between these factors in females has yet to be elucidated. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to map the current literature on the effects of aerobic exercise, sports participation, and CRF in healthy adult females, with sub-topics of pregnancy and menstrual cycle periodicity. METHODS: A scoping review of the literature was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and the PCC mnemonic (population, concept, and context). The following five databases were screened: CINAHL, Medline, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus. Eligible articles included healthy adult females, investigated aerobic exercise, sports participation or CRF, and linked outcomes to cognition. Data from included manuscripts was extracted and analyzed. Two sub-population groupings (pregnant individuals and menstrual cycle) were established to further aid the interpretation of the findings. RESULTS: Of the 300 titles and abstracts screened, 74 were eligible for full-text screening, and 28 were included in the scoping review. Of the 28 included, 14 did not control for or report on menstrual cycle phase or sex hormones. CONCLUSION: This scoping review found an inverse 'U' relationship between aerobic exercise and cognition, demonstrating an optimal dose of aerobic exercise to benefit cognitive functions. As estrogen may impact the relationship between CRF and neural growth factors, more research is needed on this pathway, independent of the menstrual cycle, to determine potential beneficial effects. It is currently unknown whether sports participation can independently impact cognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".