Patterns of time spent in sedentary behavior, physical activity, and sleep are associated with cognitive decline among CLSA participants: A latent class analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify latent classes of time spent in movement activities (leisure sitting, physical activities, and sleep), characterize them, and assess their association with changes in memory, executive functioning, and overall cognition among middle aged and older adults. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study with a 3-year follow-up. SETTING: Non-institutionalized middle aged and older adults from the general population. PARTICIPANTS: 12,212 adults aged 45-86 years from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. MEASUREMENTS: Latent Class Analysis was performed to identify groups of participants with comparable movement activities based on self-reported time spent in leisure sitting, walking, moderate and vigorous physical activity (assessed using the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly), and sleep at baseline. Multivariable linear regression models were used to examine the associations between the identified groups and reliable change in memory, executive functioning and overall cognition, measured by a validated neuropsychological battery including 6 different cognitive tests. RESULTS: Three groups were identified: Sedentary/Disturbed Sleep (SedDS, 53.9%), Intermediately Active/Normal Sleep (IntNS, 34.6%), and Active/Normal Sleep (ActNS, 11.5%). The SedDS group showed greater cognitive decline after 3 year follow-up across all cognitive domains (memory β = -0.061, 95%CI -0.100, -0.021; executive functioning β = -0.049, 95%CI -0.090, -0.008; overall cognition β = -0.067, 95%CI -0.106, -0.027) compared to IntNS. Interestingly, ActNS showed a greater cognitive decline (memory β = -0.065, 95% CI -0.124, -0.005; overall cognition β = -0.062, 95% CI -0.123, -0.002) relative to IntNS. CONCLUSION: In mid- and later life, sleep disturbances primarily coincide with a sedentary lifestyle. For optimal cognitive ageing, moderate physical activity seems more beneficial than either sedentary behavior or excessive physical activity to delay accelerated cognitive ageing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".