MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7116879489 · doi:10.1002/alz70860_099461

The independent effects of sleep fragmentation and physical activity on global cognition in healthy older adults

2025· article· en· W7116879489 on OpenAlexaff
Tara Kuhn, Laura E. Middleton, Lei Yu, Bennett Da, Aron S Buchman, Andrew Lim

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionPhysical activitySleep (system call)Physical exerciseCognitive declineEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Better sleep and higher physical activity have been linked to better cognitive function with aging. Emerging evidence shows that physical activity and sleep may interact together to support aspects of cognition such as memory and executive functioning. However, it is less certain if physical activity and sleep work together to support cognition globally. METHOD: From the Rush Memory and Aging Project, 1171 older adults without known dementia were included in this analysis. Physical activity and sleep fragmentation were measured using actigraphy. Global cognitive function was assessed using a composite score created from a 19-test cognitive battery. Multiple linear regression models were used to look at the cross-sectional association between sleep, physical activity, and global cognition. Several models were used to look at the 1) individual effects of sleep and physical activity in separate models, 2) the independent effects of sleep and physical activity in the same model, and 3) the interactive effects of sleep and physical activity. All base models controled for age at visit, sex, and education, and additional models controlled for vascular health and vascular risk factors. RESULT: When examined individually, physical activity was associated with better global cognition (b = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.01 - 0.07, p < .01). In contrast, increased sleep fragmentation was associated with worse global cognition. (b = -0.02, 95% CI = -0.05 - -0.001, p < .05). When both sleep fragmentation and physical activity were considered in the same model, these relationships remained similar. Finally, when adding an interaction term between physical activity and sleep, the interaction was non-significant (b = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.03 - 0.02, p = 0.53). All models remained significant when controlling for vascular health and vascular risk factors. CONCLUSION: Sleep and physical activity may have independent, but not interactive, impacts of global cognitive functioning. Physical activity may support better cognitive health, while having fragmented sleep may negatively impacts it. Further research is required to examine the longitudinal relationship between sleep, physical activity, and cognitive health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→