ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
When more is not always better: exercise dose and children's cognitive development from an interpretable machine learning perspective.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Exercise intervention has been associated with cognitive development in children. However, current study methods have not clarified the potential nonlinear association between exercise dosage and cognitive ability, and interpretable machine learning approaches may provide a novel perspective for exploring these complex relationships. Therefore, this study aimed to construct and verify a machine learning model of the relationship between exercise dosage and cognitive development in children. Methods: A total of 8623 valid samples from the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS) database were analyzed in this study. SPSS 25.0 was used to perform descriptive statistical analysis. SHAP values and partial dependence plots were used to enhance model interpretability. Three predictive models-Exercise Dose-Cognitive Ability Score (ED-CAS) model, Daily Physical Activity Duration-Cognitive Ability Score (DPAD-CAS) model, and Weekly Frequency of Physical Activity-Cognitive Ability Score (WFPA-CAS) model-were developed using the random forest algorithm. Results: The ED-CAS, DPAD-CAS, and WFPA-CAS models demonstrated moderate predictive performance (R² = 0.21, 0.14, and 0.11, respectively). SHAP analysis revealed mean marginal contributions of 0.12, 0.07, and 0.11 for ED, DPAD, and WFPA, respectively. Partial dependence analyses further identified normalized parameter peaks at 1.35 (ED), 1.4 (DPAD), and 0.9 (WFPA), indicating that these exercise-related features contributed differently to model predictions across dose ranges. However, dose thresholds were observed (≤720 minutes/week, ≤6 days/week, ≤85 minutes/day), beyond which CAS declined significantly. Conclusions: This study identified a potential inverted U-shaped association between exercise dosage and cognitive ability in children. The observed dose ranges may provide preliminary reference information for future exercise intervention. However, longitudinal and experimental studies are required to determine causal relationships and establish evidence-based exercise recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.