Control of diabetes and fibrinogen levels as well as improvement in health care might delay low cognitive performance in societies aging progressively

Lopes, Daniele Almeida; Moraes, Suzana Alves de; Freitas, Isabel Cristina Martins de

doi:10.1590/0004-282x20140189

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They report that those in the high sedentary time group had significantly higher odds for mild cognitive impairment. Three studies [ 36 , 53 , 82 ] separated sedentary time into tertiles. One study [ 82 ] reported the people in the highest tertile of sedentary time had the highest cognitive function while the other two [ 36 , 53 ] found the opposite (i.e., participants in the highest tertile of sedentary time had the worst cognitive function).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies [ 36 , 53 , 82 ] separated sedentary time into tertiles. One study [ 82 ] reported the people in the highest tertile of sedentary time had the highest cognitive function while the other two [ 36 , 53 ] found the opposite (i.e., participants in the highest tertile of sedentary time had the worst cognitive function). One study used quartiles to group sedentary time, based on level of physical activity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were not enough homogenous studies to meta-analyse the relationship of sedentary time as a categorical variable (i.e., high versus low) with cognitive function. For example, one study classified ‘high’ sedentary time as eight or more hours per day, comparing it to those with ‘low’ sedentary time (i.e., less than 8 h) [ 52 ] whereas another study used tertiles, separating their participants into three groups (< 180 min/day, > 180 < 308.61 min/day, > 308.61 min/day) [ 82 ]. Future studies need to explore if a dose–response relationship exists, not just investigate linear relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For studies using self-report to measure sedentary behaviour time, there were two studies for cognitive flexibility [49,51], five studies for episodic memory [43,47,49,80,81], seven for global cognitive function [38, 39, 47, Fig. 2 Forest plot of all studies reporting on an association of sedentary behaviour with cognitive function based on method of measurement (device or self-report) and cognitive domain 48,52,80,82], six for processing speed [43,47,49,51,80,81] and two for working memory [49,51]. Overall, results of the studies were mixed, with no consistent associations found for any of the domains.…”

Section: Association Of Total Sedentary Time With Cognitive Function ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Total Sedentary Time and Cognitive Function in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background An estimated 47 million people have dementia globally, and around 10 million new cases are diagnosed each year. Many lifestyle factors have been linked to cognitive impairment; one emerging modifiable lifestyle factor is sedentary time. Objective To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed literature examining the association between total sedentary time with cognitive function in middle-aged and older adults under the moderating conditions of (a) type of sedentary time measurement; (b) the cognitive domain being assessed; (c) looking at sedentary time using categorical variables (i.e., high versus low sedentary time); and (d) the pattern of sedentary time accumulation (e.g., longer versus shorter bouts). We also aimed to examine the prevalence of sedentary time in healthy versus cognitively impaired populations and to explore how experimental studies reducing or breaking up sedentary time affect cognitive function. Lastly, we aimed to conduct a quantitative pooled analysis of all individual studies through meta-analysis procedures to derive conclusions about these relationships. Methods Eight electronic databases (EMBASE; Web of Science; PsycINFO; CINAHL; SciELO; SPORTDiscus; PubMed; and Scopus) were searched from inception to February 2021. Our search included terms related to the exposure (i.e., sedentary time), the population (i.e., middle-aged and older adults), and the outcome of interest (i.e., cognitive function). PICOS framework used middle-aged and older adults where there was an intervention or exposure of any sedentary time compared to any or no comparison, where cognitive function and/or cognitive impairment was measured, and all types of quantitative, empirical, observational data published in any year were included that were published in English. Risk of bias was assessed using QualSyst. Results Fifty-three studies including 83,137 participants met the inclusion criteria of which 23 studies had appropriate data for inclusion in the main meta-analysis. The overall meta-analysis suggested that total sedentary time has no association with cognitive function (r = −0.012 [95% CI − 0.035, 0.011], p = 0.296) with marked heterogeneity (I2 = 89%). Subgroup analyses demonstrated a significant negative association for studies using a device to capture sedentary time r = −0.035 [95% CI − 0.063, − 0.008], p = 0.012). Specifically, the domains of global cognitive function (r = −0.061 [95% CI − 0.100, − 0.022], p = 0.002) and processing speed (r = −0.067, [95% CI − 0.103, − 0.030], p < 0.001). A significant positive association was found for studies using self-report (r = 0.037 [95% CI − 0.019, 0.054], p < 0.001). Specifically, the domain of processing speed showed a significant positive association (r = 0.057 [95% CI 0.045, 0.069], p < 0.001). For prevalence, populations diagnosed with cognitive impairment spent significantly more time sedentary compared to populations with no known cognitive impairments (standard difference in mean = −0.219 [95% CI − 0.310, − 0.128], p < 0.001). Conclusions The association of total sedentary time with cognitive function is weak and varies based on measurement of sedentary time and domain being assessed. Future research is needed to better categorize domains of sedentary behaviour with both a validated self-report and device-based measure in order to improve the strength of this relationship. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018082384.

show abstract