Acute cognitive effects of interruptions to prolonged sitting with brief standing or physical activity breaks: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.

IF 7.1 1区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Mingnan Zhuang, Mingyue Yin, Zongnan Liu, Ningkun Xiao, Qing Yi, Zhiwei Fan, Henghao Yan, Xiupeng Li, Bitai Wu, Shuhan Qiu, Anqi Chen, Chao Xie, Chenghao Liu, Xintong Zou, Donglin Shi
{"title":"Acute cognitive effects of interruptions to prolonged sitting with brief standing or physical activity breaks: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.","authors":"Mingnan Zhuang, Mingyue Yin, Zongnan Liu, Ningkun Xiao, Qing Yi, Zhiwei Fan, Henghao Yan, Xiupeng Li, Bitai Wu, Shuhan Qiu, Anqi Chen, Chao Xie, Chenghao Liu, Xintong Zou, Donglin Shi","doi":"10.1186/s12966-026-01953-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Prolonged sitting is strongly associated with impaired cognitive function. Although traditional exercise interventions have been shown to improve cognitive outcomes, their implementation is often limited by practical constraints. In contrast, introducing interruptions to prolonged sitting with brief bouts of standing or physical activity has emerged as a more feasible alternative. However, previous research has been dominated by qualitative reviews. Moreover, some quantitative studies have not adequately addressed effect-size dependency arising from multiple outcomes and time points within the same study, and quantitative evidence regarding specific cognitive domains and interruption-protocol parameters remains limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the PRISMA guidelines, this study systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus for randomized crossover trials published up to January 2026 that examined the effects of brief standing or physical activity breaks during prolonged sitting on cognitive function. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to pool effect sizes, with cluster-robust variance estimation used to account for effect-size dependency resulting from multiple outcomes and time points within the same study. In addition, subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to investigate potential moderating factors. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated according to the GRADE framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 21 randomized crossover trials involving 433 participants were included. Compared with prolonged sitting, sitting interruptions involving standing or physical activity were associated with improvements in executive function (k = 16 studies; Hedges' g = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.32; p = 0.016) and memory function (k = 10 studies; Hedges' g = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.61; p = 0.003). However, no clear evidence of improvement was found for global cognition (k = 2 studies; Hedges' g = 0.57; 95% CI: -0.20 to 1.34; p = 0.122), information processing (k = 4 studies; Hedges' g = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.86; p = 0.221), or attention (k = 5 studies; Hedges' g = - 0.08; 95% CI: -0.38 to 0.22; p = 0.575). The certainty of evidence was low for executive function, memory function, information processing, and attention, and very low for global cognition. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that cognitive benefits were more pronounced in older adults and in individuals with overweight or obesity. Interruptions involving walking showed relatively consistent beneficial effects, whereas low-intensity activity was associated with particularly marked improvements in memory function (p for subgroup difference < 0.05). Meta-regression indicated that a higher interruption frequency was associated with greater improvements in executive function, whereas improvements in memory function were associated with a lower interruption frequency and longer experimental exposure. Overall, however, the certainty of evidence for most outcomes was rated as low or very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Introducing brief standing or physical activity breaks during prolonged sitting may be associated with small acute improvements in executive function and memory function, although the certainty of evidence for these outcomes remains low. Evidence for global cognition, information processing, and attention remains insufficient and inconsistent, with very low certainty for global cognition. Observed differences across participant characteristics and interruption parameters should be interpreted as exploratory and are not sufficient to support definitive prescriptive recommendations. From a feasibility perspective, low-intensity walking may represent a practical option, but its relative efficacy requires confirmation in larger, higher-quality studies.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>CRD420251273873; registered 26 December 2025.</p>","PeriodicalId":50336,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13520540/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-026-01953-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Prolonged sitting is strongly associated with impaired cognitive function. Although traditional exercise interventions have been shown to improve cognitive outcomes, their implementation is often limited by practical constraints. In contrast, introducing interruptions to prolonged sitting with brief bouts of standing or physical activity has emerged as a more feasible alternative. However, previous research has been dominated by qualitative reviews. Moreover, some quantitative studies have not adequately addressed effect-size dependency arising from multiple outcomes and time points within the same study, and quantitative evidence regarding specific cognitive domains and interruption-protocol parameters remains limited.

Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, this study systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus for randomized crossover trials published up to January 2026 that examined the effects of brief standing or physical activity breaks during prolonged sitting on cognitive function. A three-level random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to pool effect sizes, with cluster-robust variance estimation used to account for effect-size dependency resulting from multiple outcomes and time points within the same study. In addition, subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to investigate potential moderating factors. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated according to the GRADE framework.

Results: A total of 21 randomized crossover trials involving 433 participants were included. Compared with prolonged sitting, sitting interruptions involving standing or physical activity were associated with improvements in executive function (k = 16 studies; Hedges' g = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.32; p = 0.016) and memory function (k = 10 studies; Hedges' g = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.61; p = 0.003). However, no clear evidence of improvement was found for global cognition (k = 2 studies; Hedges' g = 0.57; 95% CI: -0.20 to 1.34; p = 0.122), information processing (k = 4 studies; Hedges' g = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.86; p = 0.221), or attention (k = 5 studies; Hedges' g = - 0.08; 95% CI: -0.38 to 0.22; p = 0.575). The certainty of evidence was low for executive function, memory function, information processing, and attention, and very low for global cognition. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested that cognitive benefits were more pronounced in older adults and in individuals with overweight or obesity. Interruptions involving walking showed relatively consistent beneficial effects, whereas low-intensity activity was associated with particularly marked improvements in memory function (p for subgroup difference < 0.05). Meta-regression indicated that a higher interruption frequency was associated with greater improvements in executive function, whereas improvements in memory function were associated with a lower interruption frequency and longer experimental exposure. Overall, however, the certainty of evidence for most outcomes was rated as low or very low.

Conclusions: Introducing brief standing or physical activity breaks during prolonged sitting may be associated with small acute improvements in executive function and memory function, although the certainty of evidence for these outcomes remains low. Evidence for global cognition, information processing, and attention remains insufficient and inconsistent, with very low certainty for global cognition. Observed differences across participant characteristics and interruption parameters should be interpreted as exploratory and are not sufficient to support definitive prescriptive recommendations. From a feasibility perspective, low-intensity walking may represent a practical option, but its relative efficacy requires confirmation in larger, higher-quality studies.

Trial registration: CRD420251273873; registered 26 December 2025.

长时间坐着,短暂站立或体力活动中断的急性认知影响:系统回顾和三水平荟萃分析。
背景:久坐与认知功能受损密切相关。虽然传统的运动干预已被证明可以改善认知结果,但其实施往往受到实际约束的限制。相比之下,在长时间坐着的时候,短暂的站立或体育活动是一种更可行的选择。然而,以往的研究以定性评价为主。此外,一些定量研究没有充分解决同一研究中多个结果和时间点产生的效应大小依赖性,关于特定认知领域和中断协议参数的定量证据仍然有限。方法:遵循PRISMA指南,本研究系统地检索了PubMed、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、Embase和Scopus,检索了截至2026年1月发表的随机交叉试验,这些试验研究了长时间坐着时短暂站立或身体活动休息对认知功能的影响。对效应大小进行了三水平随机效应荟萃分析,使用聚类稳健方差估计来解释同一研究中多个结果和时间点产生的效应大小依赖性。此外,进行亚组和元回归分析以调查潜在的调节因素。使用Risk of bias 2工具评估偏倚风险,并根据GRADE框架评估证据的确定性。结果:共纳入21项随机交叉试验,共纳入433名受试者。与长时间坐着相比,包括站立或体力活动在内的坐着中断与执行功能(k = 16项研究;Hedges' g = 0.18; 95% CI: 0.03至0.32;p = 0.016)和记忆功能(k = 10项研究;Hedges' g = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.13至0.61;p = 0.003)的改善有关。然而,在整体认知(k = 2项研究;Hedges' g = 0.57; 95% CI: -0.20至1.34;p = 0.122)、信息处理(k = 4项研究;Hedges' g = 0.32; 95% CI: -0.21至0.86;p = 0.221)或注意力(k = 5项研究;Hedges' g = - 0.08; 95% CI: -0.38至0.22;p = 0.575)方面没有发现明显的改善证据。证据的确定性在执行功能、记忆功能、信息处理和注意力方面较低,在整体认知方面很低。探索性亚组分析表明,在老年人和超重或肥胖人群中,认知益处更为明显。包括步行的中断显示出相对一致的有益效果,而低强度的活动与记忆功能的显著改善相关(亚组差异为p)。结论:在长时间坐着期间引入短暂的站立或身体活动休息可能与执行功能和记忆功能的轻微急性改善相关,尽管这些结果的证据确定性仍然很低。关于全局认知、信息处理和注意的证据仍然不足且不一致,全局认知的确定性非常低。观察到的参与者特征和中断参数之间的差异应被解释为探索性的,不足以支持明确的规定性建议。从可行性的角度来看,低强度步行可能是一种可行的选择,但其相对功效需要在更大、更高质量的研究中得到证实。试验注册:CRD420251273873;注册于2025年12月26日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
3.40%
发文量
138
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (IJBNPA) is an open access, peer-reviewed journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. IJBNPA is devoted to furthering the understanding of the behavioral aspects of diet and physical activity and is unique in its inclusion of multiple levels of analysis, including populations, groups and individuals and its inclusion of epidemiology, and behavioral, theoretical and measurement research areas.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书