Objective. To determine if better cognitive functioning at midlife among more physically fit individuals reflects "neuroprotection," in which fitness protects against age-related cognitive decline, or "neuroselection," in which children with higher cognitive functioning select into more active lifestyles. Methods. Children in the Dunedin Longitudinal Study (N=1,037) completed the Wechsler Intelligence Scales and the Trail-Making, Rey-Delayed-Recall, and Grooved-Pegboard tasks as children and again at midlife (age-38). Adult cardiorespiratory fitness was assessed using a submaximal exercise test to estimate maximum-oxygen-consumption-adjusted-for-body-weight in milliliters/minute/kilogram (VO2 max). We tested if more-fit individuals had better cognitive functioning than their less-fit counterparts (which could be consistent with neuroprotection), and if better childhood cognitive functioning predisposed to better adult cardiorespiratory fitness (neuroselection). Finally, we examined possible mechanisms of neuroselection. Results. Participants with better cardiorespiratory fitness had higher cognitive test scores at midlife. However, fitness-associated advantages in cognitive functioning were present already in childhood. After accounting for childhood-baseline performance on the same cognitive tests, there was no association between cardiorespiratory fitness and midlife cognitive functioning. Socioeconomic and health advantages in childhood, and healthier lifestyles during young adulthood explained most of the association between childhood cognitive functioning and adult cardiorespiratory fitness. Interpretation. We found no evidence for a neuroprotective effect of cardiorespiratory fitness as of midlife. Instead, children with better cognitive functioning are selecting into healthier lives. Fitness interventions may enhance cognitive functioning. But, observational and experimental studies testing neuroprotective effects of physical fitness should consider confounding by neuroselection. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 132. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2026.
All research outputs
#401,960
of 34,601,984 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Neurology
#113
of 7,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,819
of 300,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Neurology
#2
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,601,984 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,873 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
