Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31333886›Full record

ReviewJournal of sport and health science2019

The exercise-cognition relationship: A virtuous circle.

Michel Audiffren, Nathalie André

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of sport and health science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Effect of Acute High-Intensity Interval Training on Executive Function: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Michel AudiffrenResearch Institute on Cognition and Learning (UMR CNRS 7295), University of Poitiers, Sport Sciences Faculty, Poitiers 86000, France.
Nathalie AndréResearch Institute on Cognition and Learning (UMR CNRS 7295), University of Poitiers, Sport Sciences Faculty, Poitiers 86000, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exercise and health psychology have generated 2 sets of empirical studies guided by separate theory-driven axes. The first axis focuses on the causal relationship between chronic exercise and cognition and, more particularly, high-level cognitive functions such as executive functions (EFs). The second axis examines factors influencing the adherence process to physical activity (PA). Research conducted during the past decade shows that these 2 topics are closely linked, with EFs and effortful control playing a pivotal role in the bidirectional relationship linking PA and mental/brain health. The present article supports the idea that an individual engaged in the regular practice of effortful PA initiates a virtuous circle linking PA and effortful control in a bidirectional way. On the one hand, chronic exercise leads to an improvement of EFs and effortful control. On the other hand, gains in EFs and effortful control effectiveness lead to a reciprocal facilitation of the maintenance of PA over time. Some limitations and perspectives to this effort hypothesis are proposed in the last part of the article.

Indexed as

AdherenceEffortExecutive functionsPhysical activitySalience network

Identifiers

PMID31333886
PMCPMC6620209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.