Kirsten Dillon1, Anisa Morava1, Harry Prapavessis1, Lily Grigsby-Duffy2,3, Adam Novic2,4, Paul A Gardiner5,6,7. 1. Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, Kinesiology, London, ON, Canada. 2. The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 3. Global Obesity Centre (GLOBE), Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, 3220, Australia. 4. School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. 5. Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, Kinesiology, London, ON, Canada. Paul.Gardiner@usq.edu.au. 6. The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Paul.Gardiner@usq.edu.au. 7. Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences, The University of Southern Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Paul.Gardiner@usq.edu.au.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Iva Čukić; Richard Shaw; Geoff Der; Sebastien F M Chastin; Manon L Dontje; Jason M R Gill; John M Starr; Dawn A Skelton; Ratko Radaković; Simon R Cox; Philippa M Dall; Catharine R Gale; Ian J Deary Journal: Psychol Aging Date: 2018-03
Authors: Helena J M van Alphen; Karin M Volkers; Christiaan G Blankevoort; Erik J A Scherder; Tibor Hortobágyi; Marieke J G van Heuvelen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 3.240