ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Accelerometer-Derived Relative Amplitude and Midlife Cognition: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Lower relative amplitude of the rest-activity pattern has been associated with cognitive decline and incident dementia in older adults, but its relationship with domain-specific cognitive performance during midlife is less well characterized. Objective: To examine cross-sectional associations between accelerometer-derived relative amplitude and fluid and crystallized cognitive performance among midlife adults. Design Setting and Participants: Cross-sectional analysis of 851 adults aged 35-64 years enrolled in the MidCog Study and recruited from 13 primary care clinics, including academic practices and federally qualified health centers. Participants completed a 14-day wrist accelerometer recording and the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery. Exposure: Accelerometer-derived relative amplitude, calculated from the contrast between activity during the most active consecutive 10-hour period and the least active consecutive 5-hour period. Main Outcomes and Measures: Age- and education-adjusted NIH Toolbox T-scores (normative mean = 50, SD = 10) for the Fluid Cognition Composite; attention, executive function, episodic memory, working memory, and processing speed; the Crystallized Cognition Composite; receptive language and expressive language. Multivariable linear regression models sequentially adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, other rest-activity rhythm metrics, established dementia risk factors, average activity, time in bed, and sleep efficiency. Results: In the final adjusted model, each 1-SD lower relative amplitude was associated with a 2.27-point lower Fluid Cognition Composite T-score (95% CI, 1.15-3.40). Lower relative amplitude was also associated with lower attention by 2.74 points (95% CI, 1.49-4.00), executive function by 1.49 points (95% CI, 0.51-2.47), episodic memory by 2.03 points (95% CI, 0.81-3.25), and processing speed by 1.56 points (95% CI, 0.49-2.64). Relative amplitude was not associated with working memory or crystallized cognitive outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: Among midlife adults recruited from primary care practices, lower relative amplitude was associated with modestly poorer fluid cognitive performance after adjustment for established dementia risk factors and sleep characteristics. Relative amplitude may represent a scalable behavioral correlate of cognitive variability within the normative range. Longitudinal studies beginning in midlife are needed to establish temporality, predictive value, or modifiability.
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.