Optimal levels of sleep, sedentary behaviour, and physical activity needed to support cognitive function in children of the early years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep, sedentary behaviour, physical activity, and the composition of these movement behaviours across the 24-h day are associated with cognitive function in early years children. This study used a Goldilocks day compositional data analysis approach to identify the optimal duration of sleep, sedentary behaviour, light physical activity, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity associated with desired cognitive function outcomes in early years children. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 858 children aged 2.8-5.5 years from the Sleep and Activity Database for the Early Years. 24-h movement behaviours (sleep, sedentary behaviour, light physical activity, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity) were measured using ActiGraph accelerometers. Cognitive function was measured using three tasks from the Early Years Toolbox: visual-spatial working memory, response inhibition, and expressive vocabulary. A Goldilocks day compositional data analysis approach was used in R software to identify the optimal time-use compositions associated with the best 10% of the cognitive function scores. RESULTS: The movement behaviour composition and the relative time spent in sleep and sedentary behaviour but not different intensities of physical activity were significantly associated with working memory (P ≤ 0.01). The movement behaviour composition and relative time spent in sleep, sedentary behaviour, and different intensities of physical activity were not significantly associated with response inhibition or expressive vocabulary (P > 0.2). Therefore, optimal time use was only determined for working memory. Optimal daily durations for working memory were observed with 11:00 (hr:min) of sleep, 5:42 of sedentary behaviour, 5:06 of light physical activity, and 2:12 of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. CONCLUSION: Working memory was the only cognitive function outcome related to the 24-h movement behaviour composition. Optimal sleep for working memory was consistent with current recommended durations, while optimal moderate-to-vigorous physical activity greatly exceeded minimal recommended levels. Optimal sedentary behaviour was longer and light physical activity was shorter than the sample average.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".