MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116839241 · doi:10.1002/alz70860_102231

Validity of the Shuttle Walk Test to Assess Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Persons at Varying Stages in the Alzheimer's Continuum

2025· article· en· W7116839241 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dereck Salisbury, Feng Vankee Lin, Fang Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessTest (biology)CognitionAffect (linguistics)Reliability (semiconductor)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) has been positively associated with brain volumes and health in older adults and negatively associated with dementia onset or risk and mortality. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) is a gold standard test for evaluating CRF for exercise prescription, but requires specialized equipment and is time‐ and resource‐intensive, highlighting the need for more feasible and valid options for evaluating CRF. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and relationship of the shuttle walk test (SWT) distance with peak oxygen consumption (VO 2Peak ) from cycle ergometer‐based CPET in persons with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) or mild‐to‐moderate AD dementia. Method This study used baseline data from two Phase II, single‐blinded clinical trials (The ACT Trial and The FIT‐AD Trial). The sample included 80 participants with aMCI and 90 with mild‐to‐moderate AD. Across the two studies, CRF was measured with VO 2Peak obtained from the symptom‐limited peak cycle‐ergometer test and the SWT. Data were analyzed with simple and multiple linear regression. Adjusted models included age, sex, cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] or Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE], and body mass index (BMI) that were significantly associated with VO 2peak . Result The participants included 80 from the ACT Trial (55% male, 74.1 [5.7] years, and MoCA 23.2 [2.0]) and 90 from the FIT‐AD Trial (56% males, age 77.1 [6.6] years, and MMSE 21.8 [3.4]). In persons with aMCI, SWT was positively correlated with VO 2Peak ( r = .57 p < 0.01). When controlling for age, sex, MoCA, and BMI, SWT distance remained significantly and positively associated with VO 2Peak and collectively represented 54% of the variance in VO 2Peak (F (5,69) =18.37, p <0.001). In persons with AD dementia, SWT was positively correlated with VO 2Peak ( r = .44 p <0.01). When controlling for age, sex, MMSE, and BMI, SWT distance remained significantly and positively associated with VO 2Peak and collectively represented 43% of the variance in VO 2Peak (F (5,77) =11.46, p <0.001). Conclusion SWT distance is a significant predictor of VO 2Peak in persons with cognitive impairment and remains a significant predictor in the presence of related, clinically measured covariates including age, sex, cognition, and BMI.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→