体育锻炼与健康》第 6 期:与健康相关的体育活动无关的久坐时间是老年人患痴呆症的风险因素。

IF 4.5 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Clinical Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-02-07 DOI:10.4088/JCP.24f15270
Chittaranjan Andrade
{"title":"体育锻炼与健康》第 6 期:与健康相关的体育活动无关的久坐时间是老年人患痴呆症的风险因素。","authors":"Chittaranjan Andrade","doi":"10.4088/JCP.24f15270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sedentary behaviors are leisurely behaviors that occur during waking hours performed while lying down or seated; examples are relaxing, conversing, using a smartphone, watching television, traveling in private or public transport, and thinking or working at a desk. Sedentary behaviors are common in everyday life; the average person spends 9-10 h/d sedentary. Findings from meta-analyses show that higher levels of physical activity are associated with a reduced risk of dementia and that near-absence of moderate to vigorous physical activity is associated with an increased risk of dementia. Sedentariness is a clearly defined construct that is more than just low levels of physical activity. Sedentariness, therefore, merits independent study. In this context, a recent cohort study, conducted in elderly subjects (mean age, 67 years) who were followed for a mean of 6.7 years, found that sedentariness, independent of current levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity, was associated in a dose-dependent fashion with the risk of incident dementia; the finding held true when reverse causation was addressed through the exclusion of subjects who developed dementia within 4 years of follow-up. The adjusted 10-year risk of dementia rose from about 8% with sedentariness at 10 h/d to about 23% with sedentariness at 15 h/d; the difference is clinically meaningful. Limitations of studies in the field are that residual confounding cannot be excluded, and that no randomized controlled trials exist upon which guidance may be based. Nevertheless, it could be prudent to decrease sedentary behaviors if only because these have also been associated with other adverse physical and mental health outcomes. Additional subjects explained in this article include reverse causation and how it may be dealt with during research design and data analysis, individual participant data meta-analysis, and making sense of results that are reported in terms of \"per 1,000 person-years.\"</p>","PeriodicalId":50234,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physical Exercise and Health, 6: Sedentary Time, Independent of Health-Related Physical Activity, as a Risk Factor for Dementia in Older Adults.\",\"authors\":\"Chittaranjan Andrade\",\"doi\":\"10.4088/JCP.24f15270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Sedentary behaviors are leisurely behaviors that occur during waking hours performed while lying down or seated; examples are relaxing, conversing, using a smartphone, watching television, traveling in private or public transport, and thinking or working at a desk. Sedentary behaviors are common in everyday life; the average person spends 9-10 h/d sedentary. Findings from meta-analyses show that higher levels of physical activity are associated with a reduced risk of dementia and that near-absence of moderate to vigorous physical activity is associated with an increased risk of dementia. Sedentariness is a clearly defined construct that is more than just low levels of physical activity. Sedentariness, therefore, merits independent study. In this context, a recent cohort study, conducted in elderly subjects (mean age, 67 years) who were followed for a mean of 6.7 years, found that sedentariness, independent of current levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity, was associated in a dose-dependent fashion with the risk of incident dementia; the finding held true when reverse causation was addressed through the exclusion of subjects who developed dementia within 4 years of follow-up. The adjusted 10-year risk of dementia rose from about 8% with sedentariness at 10 h/d to about 23% with sedentariness at 15 h/d; the difference is clinically meaningful. Limitations of studies in the field are that residual confounding cannot be excluded, and that no randomized controlled trials exist upon which guidance may be based. Nevertheless, it could be prudent to decrease sedentary behaviors if only because these have also been associated with other adverse physical and mental health outcomes. Additional subjects explained in this article include reverse causation and how it may be dealt with during research design and data analysis, individual participant data meta-analysis, and making sense of results that are reported in terms of \\\"per 1,000 person-years.\\\"</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.24f15270\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.24f15270","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

久坐不动行为是指在清醒时躺着或坐着进行的休闲行为,例如放松、聊天、使用智能手机、看电视、乘坐私人或公共交通工具、在办公桌前思考或工作。久坐不动的行为在日常生活中很常见;平均每人每天有 9-10 小时久坐不动。荟萃分析的结果表明,较高水平的体育锻炼与痴呆症风险的降低有关,而几乎没有中度至剧烈体育锻炼与痴呆症风险的增加有关。久坐不动是一个定义明确的概念,它不仅仅是体力活动水平低的问题。因此,久坐不动值得进行独立研究。在这种情况下,最近一项对平均年龄为 67 岁的老年受试者进行了为期 6.7 年跟踪调查的队列研究发现,久坐与发生痴呆症的风险呈剂量依赖关系,而与当前的中度至剧烈运动水平无关。调整后的 10 年痴呆症风险从久坐 10 小时/天的约 8%上升到久坐 15 小时/天的约 23%;这一差异具有临床意义。该领域研究的局限性在于无法排除残余混杂因素,也没有可作为指导依据的随机对照试验。尽管如此,减少久坐不动的行为可能是明智之举,因为这些行为也与其他不利的身心健康结果有关。本文解释的其他主题包括反向因果关系及其在研究设计和数据分析过程中的处理方法、个体参与者数据荟萃分析,以及如何理解以 "每千人年 "为单位报告的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Physical Exercise and Health, 6: Sedentary Time, Independent of Health-Related Physical Activity, as a Risk Factor for Dementia in Older Adults.

Sedentary behaviors are leisurely behaviors that occur during waking hours performed while lying down or seated; examples are relaxing, conversing, using a smartphone, watching television, traveling in private or public transport, and thinking or working at a desk. Sedentary behaviors are common in everyday life; the average person spends 9-10 h/d sedentary. Findings from meta-analyses show that higher levels of physical activity are associated with a reduced risk of dementia and that near-absence of moderate to vigorous physical activity is associated with an increased risk of dementia. Sedentariness is a clearly defined construct that is more than just low levels of physical activity. Sedentariness, therefore, merits independent study. In this context, a recent cohort study, conducted in elderly subjects (mean age, 67 years) who were followed for a mean of 6.7 years, found that sedentariness, independent of current levels of moderate to vigorous physical activity, was associated in a dose-dependent fashion with the risk of incident dementia; the finding held true when reverse causation was addressed through the exclusion of subjects who developed dementia within 4 years of follow-up. The adjusted 10-year risk of dementia rose from about 8% with sedentariness at 10 h/d to about 23% with sedentariness at 15 h/d; the difference is clinically meaningful. Limitations of studies in the field are that residual confounding cannot be excluded, and that no randomized controlled trials exist upon which guidance may be based. Nevertheless, it could be prudent to decrease sedentary behaviors if only because these have also been associated with other adverse physical and mental health outcomes. Additional subjects explained in this article include reverse causation and how it may be dealt with during research design and data analysis, individual participant data meta-analysis, and making sense of results that are reported in terms of "per 1,000 person-years."

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: For over 75 years, The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry has been a leading source of peer-reviewed articles offering the latest information on mental health topics to psychiatrists and other medical professionals.The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry is the leading psychiatric resource for clinical information and covers disorders including depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, anxiety, addiction, posttraumatic stress disorder, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder while exploring the newest advances in diagnosis and treatment.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and Safety of Ketamine/Esketamine in Bipolar Depression in a Clinical Setting. Integrating Previous Suicide Attempts, Gender, and Age Into Suicide Risk Assessment Using Advanced Artificial Intelligence Models. Long-Term Changes in Cognition Among Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders and Different Durations of Illness: A Meta-Analysis. Regression: Understanding What Covariates and Confounds Do in Adjusted Analyses. Diagnostic Assessment via Live Telehealth (Phone or Video) Versus Face-to-Face for the Diagnoses of Psychiatric Conditions: A Systematic Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1