CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 286Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryAging and Gerontology Research

Evidence for Neurocognitive Plasticity in At-Risk Older Adults: The Experience Corps Program

Open access
Carlson, M. C., Erickson, K. I., Kramer, A. F., Voss, M. W., Bolea, N., Mielke, M., McGill, S., Rebok, G. W. +2 more·2009·The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
DOI 10.1093/gerona/glp117PMC PMC2781785
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Experience Corps (EC), a social service program, would improve age-vulnerable executive functions and increase activity in brain regions in a high-risk group through increased cognitive and physical activity. METHODS: Eight community-dwelling, older female volunteers and nine matched wait-list controls were recruited to serve in the ongoing EC: Baltimore program in three elementary schools. We employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) preintervention and postintervention to examine whether EC volunteers improved executive function and showed increased activity in the prefrontal cortex relative to controls. fMRI volunteers were trained and placed with other volunteers 15 h/wk for 6 months during the academic year to assist teachers in kindergarten through third grade to promote children's literacy and academic achievement. RESULTS: Participants were African American and had low education, low income, and low Mini-Mental State Examination scores (M = 24), indicative of elevated risk for cognitive impairment. Volunteers exhibited intervention-specific increases in brain activity in the left prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex over the 6-month interval relative to matched controls. Neural gains were matched by behavioral improvements in executive inhibitory ability. CONCLUSIONS: Using fMRI, we demonstrated intervention-specific short-term gains in executive function and in the activity of prefrontal cortical regions in older adults at elevated risk for cognitive impairment. These pilot results provide proof of concept for use-dependent brain plasticity in later life, and, that interventions designed to promote health and function through everyday activity may enhance plasticity in key regions that support executive function.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a pilot fMRI study, 8 older African American women volunteering in Experience Corps and 9 matched wait-list controls showed intervention-specific increases in left prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate activity and improved executive inhibitory performance over 6 months. The authors conclude this provides proof of concept for use-dependent neurocognitive plasticity in at-risk older adults.

Key findings

  • Experience Corps volunteers showed intervention-specific increases in brain activity over 6 months relative to controls in the anterior cingulate cortex (Time × Group: F(1,13) = 13.22; p < .003), left dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (F(1,13) = 5.16; p < .04), and left ventral lateral prefrontal cortex (F(1,13) = 8.99; p < .01).
  • Behavioral gains matched neural changes: the intervention group had a greater reduction in interference scores over 6 months (Time × Group: F(1,13) = 5.28; p < .04), and accuracy improved in the incongruent conditions (Time × Group × Congruency: F(1,13) = 5.77; p < .03).
  • Participants were African American with low education, low income, and low Mini-Mental State Examination scores (abstract M = 24; table EC M = 24.5 vs control M = 26.4), indicating elevated risk for cognitive impairment.
  • No regions showed an intervention-related decrease in activity; right prefrontal regions did not show significant changes meeting threshold.

Methods

  • Pilot pre–post fMRI study with 8 community-dwelling older female Experience Corps volunteers and 9 matched wait-list controls, recruited to the ongoing EC: Baltimore program in three elementary schools; volunteers were trained and placed 15 h/wk for 6 months during the academic year to assist teachers in kindergarten through third grade with literacy and academic achievement.
  • Participants completed a flanker selective attention task during 3.0T fMRI, with four conditions (congruent/incongruent × small/large cue) presented 40 times each for 160 trials; analyses used repeated measures ANOVA and FSL/FLAME with regions of interest in the anterior cingulate cortex and left/right dorsal and ventral prefrontal cortex, thresholded at Z > 3.1 and corrected cluster p = .01.

Limitations

  • Stated: the small sample was necessarily restricted to women due to gender differences in brain morphology, limiting generalizability; it remains unknown whether the program enhances or maintains cognition among more ethnically and socioeconomically diverse individuals.
  • Stated: the design cannot definitively discern whether effects were mediated primarily by cognitive versus physical pathways, or whether benefits represent synergy across activity domains.
  • Evident: this is a small pilot with matched wait-list controls rather than a large randomized trial; laterality differences and their functional significance are unclear, and the authors state these hypotheses require replication in a larger sample; structural changes and supporting white matter tracts were not determined.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/gerona/glp117

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 29 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    Accuracy rates did not reliably differ between the control and intervention groups at baseline.

    “Accuracy rates did not reliably differ between the control and the intervention groups at baseline (all p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    The three-way interaction for accuracy was due to a greater intervention-specific improvement in accuracy in the incongruent conditions (p<.05).

    “Post hoc comparisons revealed that this three-way interaction was due to a greater intervention-specific improvement in accuracy in the incongruent conditions (p < .05)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    The right prefrontal regions, although active at baseline for both groups, did not show significant changes in activation that met threshold.

    “The right prefrontal regions, although active at baseline for both groups, did not show significant changes in activation that met threshold.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    In the ACC, there was a significant Time × Group interaction (F(1,13)=13.22; p<.003).

    “In a repeated measures analysis of the ACC (cluster size = 1704 mm3), we observed a significant Time × Group interaction (F (1,13) = 13.22; p < .003)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Neural gains were matched by behavioral improvements in executive inhibitory ability.

    “Neural gains were matched by behavioral improvements in executive inhibitory ability.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 15
  • May combine two claims. 16

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    At baseline, response times were slower for the incongruent condition than for the congruent condition.

    “Furthermore, at baseline, RTs were slower for the incongruent condition compared with the congruent condition (F (1,15) = 21.27; p < .001) and for large cues compared with small cues (F (1,15) = 25.33; p < .001), as expected.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    No other main effects or interactions for accuracy were significant.

    “No other main effects or interactions were significant (all p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    The fMRI protocol was well tolerated at baseline and follow-up.

    “No adverse events were reported in the intervention or control arms, and the fMRI protocol was well tolerated at baseline and follow-up.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    At baseline, accuracy was marginally worse for large cues compared with small cues.

    “At baseline, accuracy was worse for the incongruent condition compared with the congruent condition (F (1,15) = 6.32; p < .02) and marginally worse for large cues compared with small cues (F (1,15) = 2.59; p < .06).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    At baseline, both groups showed improved performance on the incongruent condition when a small cue was available but no similar benefit of cue size on the congruent condition.

    “At baseline, both groups showed improved performance on the incongruent condition when a small cue was available but showed no similar benefit of cue size on the congruent condition (F (1,15) = 19.52; p < .001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    No adverse events were reported in the intervention or control arms.

    “No adverse events were reported in the intervention or control arms, and the fMRI protocol was well tolerated at baseline and follow-up.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    There was a nonsignificant increase in right dorsal prefrontal activity for the incongruent condition for both the intervention and control groups (p < .16).

    “However, there was a nonsignificant increase in the right dorsal prefrontal activity for the incongruent condition for both the intervention and the control groups (p < .16).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    The fMRI pilot participants were African American and had low education, low income, and low Mini-Mental State Examination scores (mean about 24-25).

    “Participants were African American and had low education, low income, and low Mini-Mental State Examination scores (M = 24), indicative of elevated risk for cognitive impairment.”
    • Also stated in: § METHODS · plain
      “Participants were African American, 80% of whom had a high school education and marginally normal global cognitive scores on the MMSE (average = 24.5).”
    • Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
      “Participants were African American, with low income, low education levels, and an average MMSE score of 25, a score lower than typically observed in volunteer samples.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    At baseline, accuracy was worse for the incongruent condition compared with the congruent condition.

    “At baseline, accuracy was worse for the incongruent condition compared with the congruent condition (F (1,15) = 6.32; p < .02) and marginally worse for large cues compared with small cues (F (1,15) = 2.59; p < .06).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    The small cue improved accuracy more for the incongruent condition than for the congruent condition.

    “In addition, the small cue improved accuracy more for the incongruent condition than the congruent condition (F (1,15) = 4.52; p < .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § RESULTS

    Neither congruency nor cue size interacted with time or group for the left vLPFC.

    “Again, neither congruency nor cue size interacted with time or group, indicating that the intervention group showed increases in this region across all conditions (Figure 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § DISCUSSION

    The study observed EC-related increases in the ACC during the executive function task, whereas the exercise intervention led to decreased activation in this region.

    “First, we observed EC-related increases in the ACC during the executive function task, whereas the exercise intervention led to decreased activation in this region.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § DISCUSSION

    The study observed lateralized increases in left prefrontal cortical activity in the EC sample while the exercise intervention observed right prefrontal cortical increases.

    “Second, we observed the lateralized increases in left prefrontal cortical activity in the EC sample while the exercise intervention observed the right prefrontal cortical increases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § DISCUSSION

    Those enrolled in the program met the intensive service requirements, which led to unprecedented doses over a relatively short-exposure period.

    “and those enrolled in the program met the intensive service requirements, which led to unprecedented doses over a relatively short-exposure period.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § RESULTS

    Only one participant, in the intervention group, dropped out prior to follow-up due to personal health reasons.

    “Only one participant, in the intervention group, dropped out prior to follow-up due to personal health reasons.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisereasoning
    § Conclusions

    Complex environments impose cognitive challenges through the diversity of stimuli and the number of decisions required.

    “Complex environments impose cognitive challenges through the diversity of stimuli and the number of decisions required.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Conclusions

    Using fMRI, the study demonstrated intervention-specific short-term gains in executive function and in the activity of prefrontal cortical regions in older adults at elevated risk for cognitive impairment.

    “Using fMRI, we demonstrated intervention-specific short-term gains in executive function and in the activity of prefrontal cortical regions in older adults at elevated risk for cognitive impairment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § Conclusions

    Complex environments exercise organizational, inhibitory, and working memory skills, all components of executive function.

    “As a result, they exercise organizational, inhibitory, and working memory skills, all components of executive function.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Conclusions

    Leisure-time cognitive, physical, and social activities help maintain cognitive and functional health.

    “Epidemiological observational studies have suggested that leisure-time cognitive, physical, and social activities help maintain cognitive and functional health (for reviews, see (2,3)).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [2] Fratiglioni L, Paillard-Borg S, Winblad B. An active and socially integrated lifestyle in late life might protect against dementia. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(6):343–353. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00767-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [3] Studenski S, Carlson MC, Fillit H, Greenough WT, Kramer A, Rebok GW. From bedside to bench: does mental and physical activity promote cognitive vitality in late life? Sci Aging Knowledge Environ. 2006;2006(10):pe21. doi: 10.1126/sageke.2006.10.pe21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § DISCUSSION

    The results replicate and build on the previous pilot trial of EC and cognition, and on an fMRI trial of physical activity in older adults.

    “The results replicate and build on the previous pilot trial of EC and cognition, and on an fMRI trial of physical activity in older adults.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § DISCUSSION

    This pilot study provides proof of concept for the feasibility and utility of neuroimaging to begin to understand how a multimodal activity program in the community gets under the skin to improve executive functions and supporting brain regions.

    “This pilot study provides proof of concept for the feasibility and utility of neuroimaging to begin to understand how a multimodal activity program in the community gets under the skin to improve executive functions and supporting brain regions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § METHODS

    The regions of interest were similar to activated regions found in previous studies of the flanker task.

    “These ROIs were similar to activated regions found in previous studies of the flanker task (26).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26] Colcombe SJ, Kramer AF, Erickson KI, et al. Cardiovascular fitness, cortical plasticity, and aging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(9):3316–3321. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400266101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § DISCUSSION

    These at-risk individuals exhibited measurable brain plasticity in direct response to such environmental enrichment, providing initial evidence of this program's potential to reverse cognitive and corresponding neural declines with age.

    “These at-risk individuals exhibited measurable brain plasticity in direct response to such environmental enrichment, providing initial evidence of this program’s potential to reverse cognitive and corresponding neural declines with age.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The observed cognitive and neural changes are attributable to the Experience Corps intervention rather than to other factors.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Conclusions

    Executive functions may contribute to both memory and functional difficulties and serve as an important target for preventive interventions.

    “These findings suggest that executive functions may contribute to both memory and functional difficulties and serve as an important target for preventive interventions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § DISCUSSION

    The small sample size, necessarily restricted to women due to gender differences in brain morphology, limits generalizability.

    “Limitations of this pilot study include the small sample size necessarily restricted to women (due to gender differences in brain morphology), which limits generalizability”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § DISCUSSION

    Recent epidemiological evidence in twin pairs suggests that socially engaging cognitive activities in midlife and early late-life may reduce risk for AD and dementia decades later and may be indicative of an enriched environment, which enhances the proliferation of new brain cells and promotes brain repair in animal models.

    “Recent epidemiological evidence in twin pairs suggests that socially engaging cognitive activities in midlife and early late-life may reduce risk for AD and dementia decades later (30) and may be indicative of an enriched environment, which enhances the proliferation of new brain cells and promotes brain repair in animal models (31–33).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [30] Carlson MC, Helms MJ, Steffens DC, Burke JR, Potter GG, Plassman BL. Midlife activity predicts risk of dementia in older male twin pairs. Alzheimers Dement. 2008;4(5):324–331. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2008.07.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [31] Gould E, Beylin A, Tanapat P, Reeves A, Shors TJ. Learning enhances adult neurogenesis in the hippocampal formation. Nat Neurosci. 1999;2(3):260–265. doi: 10.1038/6365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [32] Greenough WT, Cohen NJ, Juraska JM. New neurons in old brains: learning to survive? Nat Neurosci. 1999;2(3):203–205. doi: 10.1038/6300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [33] van Praag H, Kempermann G, Gage F. Running increases cell proliferation and neurogenesis in the adult mouse dentate gyrus. Nat Neurosci. 1999;2(3):266–270. doi: 10.1038/6368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § DISCUSSION

    The implications of these findings for the assessment of postretirement lifestyle activity are that a broader range of cognitive activities embedded within social settings may confer great cognitive and brain benefits for older adults.

    “The implications of these findings to the assessment of postretirement lifestyle activity are that a broader range of cognitive activities embedded within social settings may confer great cognitive and brain benefits for older adults.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § DISCUSSION

    These improvements extended to corresponding increases in the activity of supporting prefrontal cortical substrates, further replicating seminal findings on the neurocognitive benefit of physical activity.

    “These improvements extended to corresponding increases in the activity of supporting prefrontal cortical substrates, further replicate seminal findings on the neurocognitive benefit of physical activity (26–28).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [26] Colcombe SJ, Kramer AF, Erickson KI, et al. Cardiovascular fitness, cortical plasticity, and aging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(9):3316–3321. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400266101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [27] Colcombe SJ, Erickson KI, Scalf PE, et al. Aerobic exercise training increases brain volume in aging humans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61(11):1166–1170. doi: 10.1093/gerona/61.11.1166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [28] Kramer A, Erickson KI, Colcombe SJ. Exercise, cognition and the aging brain. J Appl Physiol. 2006;101(4):1237–1242. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00500.2006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § DISCUSSION

    As in a prior pilot trial of EC, these individuals were at elevated risk for executive dysfunction and likely exerted more effort to successfully develop inhibitory skills, which may be reflected by increased ACC activity.

    “Thus, as in a prior pilot trial of EC (21), these individuals were at elevated risk for executive dysfunction and likely exerted more effort to successfully develop inhibitory skills, which may be reflected by increased ACC activity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [21] Carlson MC, Saczynski JS, Rebok GW, et al. Exploring the effects of an “everyday” activity program on executive function and memory in older adults: Experience Corps. Gerontologist. 2008;48(6):793–801. doi: 10.1093/geront/48.6.793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: The ACC is involved in efficient filtering or inhibiting of conflicting information prior to generation of a motor response.
29 of 29

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Flanker task validly measures executive inhibitory ability.

    “This selective attention task measures one’s ability to rapidly determine the direction of a central target (arrow) while effectively inhibiting distracting information that flanks the target and may conflict with the target response (e.g., central target points left, whereas flanking arrows point right).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Changes in fMRI BOLD activity in the left prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex reflect use-dependent neurocognitive plasticity.

    “These pilot results provide proof of concept for use-dependent brain plasticity in later life, and, that interventions designed to promote health and function through everyday activity may enhance plasticity in key regions that support executive function.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The observed cognitive and neural changes are attributable to the Experience Corps intervention rather than to other factors.

    “These at-risk individuals exhibited measurable brain plasticity in direct response to such environmental enrichment”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The ACC is involved in efficient filtering or inhibiting of conflicting information prior to generation of a motor response.

    “The ACC has been implicated in the efficient filtering or inhibiting of conflicting information prior to generation of a motor response.”
4 of 4

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Reported overall MMSE mean conflicts with group means

    Minor

    The abstract reports an overall MMSE mean of 24, but Table 1 gives means of 24.5 for eight intervention participants and 26.4 for nine controls. Those group figures imply an overall mean of about 25.5.

  • Claim of 100% retention conflicts with a reported dropout

    Minor

    The results state that one intervention participant dropped out before follow-up, whereas the discussion describes retention on repeated exams as 100%.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 2009, The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 64, 110
  2. 2004, 44, 195
  3. 2003, 41, 1929
  4. Fried, 1997, Western Journal of Medicine, 167, 216
  5. Carlson, 2000, Aging (Milan, Italy), 12, 132

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carlson, M. C., Erickson, K. I., Kramer, A. F., Voss, M. W., Bolea, N., Mielke, M., McGill, S., Rebok, G. W., Seeman, T., & Fried, L. P.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-08-19
Volume
64A
Issue
12
Pages
1275-1282
ISSN
  • 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-535X
DOI
10.1093/gerona/glp117
PMC
PMC2781785
OpenAlex
W2146068507
Semantic Scholar
4c03cf8c0614eedc3752b5dd16e46f0949ab83a1
Cited by
286
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 20
FWCI
11.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series A (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P30AG021334)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
executive function, older adults, prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, inhibitory control, cognitive impairment risk, physical activity, cognitive activity
MeSH terms
Aged, Aging, Analysis of Variance, Black or African American, Cognition Disorders, Educational Status, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Promotion, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Pilot Projects, Probability, United States, Cohort Studies, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Case-Control Studies, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review