Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40821615›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2025

Uncovering the link between incidental physical activity and inhibition of automatic responses in aging. An ERP study.

Javier Sanchez-Lopez, Juan Silva-Pereyra, Sergio Manuel Sánchez-Moguel, Graciela Catalina Alatorre-Cruz, Mauricio González-López, Jorge A Sigg-Alonso, Mariana Pérez-Figueroa, Thalía Fernández

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Javier Sanchez-LopezEscuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores Unidad Juriquilla, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Juan Silva-PereyraFacultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Estado de México, Mexico.
Sergio Manuel Sánchez-MoguelLaboratorio de Psicofisiología, Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Graciela Catalina Alatorre-CruzLaboratorio de Psicofisiología, Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Mauricio González-LópezEscuela Nacional de Estudios Superiores Unidad Juriquilla, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Jorge A Sigg-AlonsoLaboratorio de Psicofisiología, Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Mariana Pérez-FigueroaLaboratorio de Psicofisiología, Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.
Thalía FernándezLaboratorio de Psicofisiología, Departamento de Neurobiología Conductual y Cognitiva, Instituto de Neurobiología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Querétaro, Mexico.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of cognitive reserve explains how the brain maintains function despite age-related changes or neuropathological damage. Factors such as education, cognitive stimulation, and physical activity contribute to strengthening this reserve. While research has highlighted the benefits of structured exercise, less attention has been given to the impact of incidental physical activity (IPA) everyday, unplanned movements like walking or household chores. This study examined the relationship between IPA and the inhibition of automatic responses, a key executive function that tends to decline with age. A total of 59 healthy older adults (mean age = 67; standard deviation = 4.95; range = 60-82; 35 females) were assessed and divided into two groups based on their IPA levels, measured using the Yale Physical Activity Survey. They then completed a Counting-Stroop task, designed to assess inhibitory control, while event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded to measure brain activity. Behavioral results confirmed the Stroop effect in both groups, with similar patterns observed overall and only one between-group difference during the incongruent condition. ERP analyses revealed greater late negativity as a result of the differences between conditions (1,050-1,200 ms) during the counting-Stroop task in the high-IPA group, suggesting more effective late-stage inhibitory processing post-execution likely related to re-evaluation and resolution of the conflict, while the low-IPA group lacked this effect. Furthermore, distinct neural activity patterns between the conditions were observed for each group as well. The high-IPA group showed differences between congruent and incongruent conditions between 300 and 500 ms, suggesting earlier conflict monitoring, while the low-IPA group exhibited significant differences over frontal areas in the 500-700 ms window, likely suggesting a different strategy for resolving interference. These findings suggest that IPA may enhance executive function by mainly supporting the later stages of inhibitory control mechanisms at a neural level, even when behavioral performance remains comparable. Given its accessibility, IPA may be a valuable strategy to maintain cognitive reserve and promote healthy aging. Future research is necessary to further explore the relationship between IPA and cognition in the context of cognitive reserve.

Indexed as

agingcognitive reserveevent-related potentialsincidental physical activityinhibition of automatic responses

Identifiers

PMID40821615
PMCPMC12354379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.