The Effects of Time‐Restricted Feeding on Handgrip Strength, Vigilance, and Perceived Anxiety and Depression in Older Adults: A Comparative Study Between Active and Sedentary Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aims: Ramadan intermittent fasting (RIF), a form of time-restricted feeding, influences various physiological and psychological functions. However, its effects on older adults remain insufficiently understood. This study examined the impact of RIF on physical and mental health parameters, comparing active and sedentary older individuals. Specifically, we assessed handgrip strength (HGS), vigilance performance, anxiety, and depression levels to determine whether regular physical activity mitigates potential adverse effects of RIF. Methods: = 32) based on self-reported physical activity levels. Assessments were conducted before and during RIF and included HGS measurement using a handheld dynamometer, a digital psychomotor vigilance test, and validated questionnaires (General Anxiety Disorder-7, Geriatric Depression Scale, and Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly). Results: During RIF, both groups showed significant improvements in vigilance, anxiety, and depression scores, with more pronounced benefits in the active group. However, sedentary participants experienced a decline in HGS, whereas active individuals maintained stable muscle strength. Conclusion: Regular physical activity during RIF appears to enhance vigilance and mental health while preventing muscle strength decline in older adults. These findings highlight the importance of maintaining an active lifestyle during RIF to support both physical and mental health in aging populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".