4.7 Article

White matter microstructure mediates the association between physical fitness and cognition in healthy, young adults

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-49301-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [FOR2107 DA1151/5-1, DA1151/5-2, SFB-TRR58]
  2. Interdisciplinary Centre for Clinical Research (IZKF) of the Medical Faculty of Munster [Dan3/012/17, SEED 11/18]
  3. Deanery of the Medical Faculty of the University of Munster
  4. 16 NIH Institutes and Centers [1U54MH091657]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We aimed to extend our knowledge on the relationship between physical fitness (PF) and both white matter microstructure and cognition through in-depth investigation of various cognitive domains while accounting for potentially relevant nuisance covariates in a well-powered sample. To this end, associations between walking endurance, diffusion-tensor-imaging (DTI) based measures of fractional anisotropy (FA) within brain white matter and cognitive measures included in the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery were investigated in a sample of n = 1206 healthy, young adults (mean age = 28.8; 45.5% male) as part of the human connectome project. Higher levels of endurance were associated with widespread higher FA (p(FWE) < 0.05) as well as with enhanced global cognitive function (p < 0.001). Significant positive relationships between endurance and cognitive performance were similarly found for almost all cognitive domains. Higher FA was significantly associated with enhanced global cognitive function (p < 0.001) and FA was shown to significantly mediate the association between walking endurance and cognitive performance. Inclusion of potentially relevant nuisance covariates including gender, age, education, BMI, HBA1c, and arterial blood pressure did not change the overall pattern of results. These findings support the notion of a beneficial and potentially protective effect of PF on brain structure and cognition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据