Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Several studies suggest that physical activity improves cognitive functions and reduces cognitive decline, whereas others did not find any evidence of a neuroprotective effect. Furthermore, few cohort studies have analyzed the different physical activity types and particularly household activities. Our objective was to assess the association of two physical activity types with the decline in different cognitive domains in a large prospective cohort of community-dwelling older adults from the Three-city study. Physical activity (domestic/transportation activities and leisure/sport activities) was assessed with the Voorrips questionnaire, specific for older adults. Baseline sociodemographic and health history variables as well as cognitive performance data at baseline and during the 8-year follow-up (Mini-Mental State Examination, Benton Visual Retention Test, Trail Making Tests A and B, Isaac's Set Test and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test) were also available. Associations between physical activity scores and cognitive decline in different domains were tested using minimally- and multi-adjusted linear mixed models. The analysis included 1697 participants without dementia at baseline and with at least one follow-up visit. At baseline, participants with higher sub-scores for the two physical activity types had better cognitive performances. Interaction with time showed that decline in some cognitive scores (Trail Making Test B and Isaac's Set Test) was significantly less pronounced in participants with higher household/transportation activity sub-scores. No significant effect over time was found for leisure/sport activities. This study shows that during an 8-year follow-up, executive functions and verbal fluency were better preserved in older adults who performed household/transportation activities at moderate to high level. Participation in domestic activities and using adapted transport means could allow older adults to maintain specific cognitive abilities.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 68/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 40 of the 59 points it could be judged on, which is 68 of 100. Total 68 of 100.40 of the 59 points we could judge = 68 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 40 of the 59 points we could judge it on, which is 68 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (PloS one)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 7 / 12 A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,697 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34061901)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 40 / 59 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 59 points we could judge it on is 68 out of 100.
Total 68 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Dupré, C., Helmer, C., Bongue, B., Dartigues, J. F., Roche, F., Berr, C., et al. (2021). Associations between physical activity types and multi-domain cognitive decline in older adults from the Three-city cohort. PloS one. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252500

Vancouver

Dupré C, Helmer C, Bongue B, Dartigues JF, Roche F, Berr C, et al. Associations between physical activity types and multi-domain cognitive decline in older adults from the Three-city cohort. PloS one. 2021. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252500. PMID: 34061901.

BibTeX

@article{dupre2021-34061901,
  author  = {Dupré, Caroline and Helmer, Catherine and Bongue, Bienvenu and Dartigues, Jean François and Roche, Frédéric and Berr, Claudine and Carrière, Isabelle},
  title   = {{Associations between physical activity types and multi-domain cognitive decline in older adults from the Three-city cohort}},
  journal = {PloS one},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.1371/journal.pone.0252500},
  pmid    = {34061901},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252500}
}

Related studies in Prevention trials

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →