MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Movement and brain health in perimenopausal and early postmenopausal females: A scoping review

2025· article· en· W4415103980 on OpenAlexafffund
Wejdaan Faridi, Julia T. Daun, Tana Dhruva, Emma McLaughlin, Imrose Bhullar, Genoa Bolianatz, Elaine Gentleman, Alix Hayden, S. Nicole Culos‐Reed, Meghan H. McDonough, Cindy K. Barha

Bibliographic record

VenueMaturitas · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWeston Family Foundation
KeywordsMovement (music)Postmenopausal womenMenopauseMEDLINEMovement disorders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The menopause transition is associated with dramatic fluctuations and eventual decline in levels of ovarian hormones, leading to loss of neuroprotection, marking this as an important intervention period for brain health promotion in females. Physical activity and exercise can improve brain health in older, postmenopausal females. Whether movement (physical activity and exercise) can protect brain health in perimenopausal and early postmenopausal females is not clear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review was to map the literature examining the relationship between movement and brain health in perimenopausal and early postmenopausal females, with a focus on identifying key methodological approaches and gaps in the knowledge. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review considered studies of any design that included a movement component with a primary focus on perimenopausal females and secondary focus on early postmenopausal females, with a brain health outcome. METHODS: This scoping review followed JBI recommendations and methodology and the PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. The following databases were searched: Medline All (OVID), Embase (OVID), APA PsycInfo (OVID), Scopus (Elsevier), CINAHL (Ebsco), and SportDiscus (Ebsco). Details about participant population, study methods, and key findings were extracted. RESULTS: Of the 30,927 identified records, 19 studies were included in the synthesis, with 3 studies conducted with only perimenopausal females, 8 studies with only early postmenopausal females, and 8 studies with a mixed cohort. Aerobic training was the most common form of movement (n = 7) and executive function was the most common brain health outcome measured (n = 12). Benefits of movement on brain health were seen in 13 studies (68.4%). CONCLUSION: In this scoping review, we cover the limited research published to date that explores movement and brain health in perimenopausal and early postmenopausal females. While current research provides promising support for the effectiveness of exercise and physical activity to promote brain health during this period of the lifespan, more high-quality studies in perimenopause are needed with standardized reproductive staging and comprehensive brain health and menopausal symptom measures to establish the effectiveness of exercise during this critical neuro-aging period. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F52JR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0130.014
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaturitasSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207