Lifestyle Empowerment for Alzheimer’s Prevention Prescribed by Physicians: Methods and Adaptations to COVID-19
================================================================================================================

* Amanda N. Szabo-Reed
* Amber Watts
* Eric Vidoni
* Jonathan Mahnken
* Angela Van Sciver
* Katrina Finley
* John Clutton
* Rachel Holden
* Mickeal Key
* Jeffery Burns

## Abstract

The health care system is insufficiently capitalizing on the benefits of physical exercise in America’s aging population. Few practical tools exist to help clinicians incorporate physical activity into their clinical care, while significant barriers limit older adults from initiating and maintaining exercise programs. The Lifestyle Empowerment for Alzheimer’s Prevention (LEAP! Rx) Program will use two forms of participant enrollment: direct physician referrals through electronic health records (HER) and self-referrals to test the efficacy of delivering a community-based exercise and healthy lifestyle program to older adults. After referral into the program, participants will be randomized to receive the LEAP! Rx Program or be placed on a standard of care waitlist. The LEAP! Rx program will consist of a personalized and structured exercise program combined with lifestyle education and mobile-health (m-Health) monitoring. This includes a 12-week Empowerment phase with intensive coaching and supervised exercise training, followed by a 40-week Lifestyle phase with intermittent supervised exercise and coaching. Lifestyle education includes monthly, evidence-based classes on optimal aging. This study will examine 1) the efficacy of the LEAP!Rx Program on increasing and sustaining cardiorespiratory fitness, 2) test the effect of the LEAP! Rx Program on secondary outcome measures of chronic disease risk factors, including insulin resistance, body composition, and lipids, and 3) assess the implementation and scalability of the LEAP!Rx Program for clinicians and patients and package best practices in implementation manuals. If successful, this study’s findings could potentially revolutionize future healthcare practices, providing a new and practical approach to aging and chronic disease prevention.

Keywords
*   Exercise
*   Physical Activity
*   Healthy Lifestyle
*   Intervention
*   RCT
*   health care delivery
*   exercise prescription
*   cardiorespiratory fitness
*   recruitment

## 1.0 Introduction

The unprecedented growth of the elderly population underscores the need for innovation in promoting health in America’s seniors.[1, 2] Americans live longer than ever. [3] Approximately 20 percent of the population is 65 years and older, and this age group will continue to increase. [4] Aging brings increased cognitive and physical decline with dramatic rises in the risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). [1] There is strong evidence that lifestyle interventions can modify these risks. [5]

### 1.2 Lifestyle Interventions Represent Promising Prevention Strategies

Ongoing research suggests that modifying lifestyle behaviors represents an essential strategy for preventing age-related chronic disease. [5] Physical activity is among the most important and cost-effective tools available for chronic disease management. [6] with its well-described effects on diabetes,[7, 8] obesity,[9–12] hypertension,[13] and depression.[14, 15] Recent research suggests exercise also benefits the brain. [16–19] Increased cardiorespiratory fitness in early Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) is associated with increased whole-brain volume,[16] most strongly in regions relevant to AD (the hippocampus and parietal lobe).[17] Longitudinal studies suggest a decline in cardiorespiratory fitness is associated with brain atrophy in early AD and cognitively normal controls.[18] Insulin levels are associated with cognitive performance and brain volume.[20–22] Specifically, physical activity modulates several important vascular risk factors – atherosclerosis,[23] heart disease,[24] stroke,[25] diabetes[26–31], inflammation,[32] and insulin signaling,[33–36] – that represent essential components of age-related disease.[37]

### 1.3 Public Health Efforts Currently Fall Short

There has been little systematic progress in translating lifestyle intervention research into meaningful gains in population health. While lab-based trials demonstrate efficacy in highly controlled environments, they are often impractical when translated to the broader population. Many clinicians recommend increased physical activity to their patients. This recommendation, however, lacks specificity[38], and numerous barriers conspire against older adults to limit physical activity.[39] In addition, recommendations from clinicians are often singular events with little follow-up. The current approach of education and encouragement alone is insufficient: up to 25% of all adults in the U.S. are entirely sedentary, and more than half are insufficiently active to achieve health benefits [6, 40], with physical activity levels declining through adulthood to low levels in older adults,[6, 41, 42] exacerbating the risk of functional decline.[43] Therefore, we should provide clinicians with specific, practical tools to help their patients initiate and sustain healthy lifestyle behaviors. This requires innovation in optimizing the delivery of lifestyle-based interventions to the public. A critical gap exists for patients to navigate between the clinician’s office and the resources to support a healthier lifestyle (i.e., fitness centers, trainers, dietitians). The LEAP! Rx Program seeks to fill that gap and builds on documented success when clinicians specifically prescribe exercise.[44–47]

### 1.4 Importance of an Individualized, Community-Based Approach

To fill this gap, the LEAP! Rx Program was designed as a flexible approach using community-based fitness resources to help individuals overcome barriers such as motivation, access, and support. The LEAP! Rx Program leverages the patient’s clinician, familiar institutions, a supervised exercise prescription, and monitoring as entry points to initiate and sustain habitual physical activity. The program relies on three design features to encourage sustained changes in health behavior: individualization, feedback, and accessibility. Personal LEAP! Rx Coaches trained in motivational interviewing will assess readiness for change[48] and identify individual motivations, goals, and barriers to sustained physical activity. Feedback is essential in supporting the intervention through self-monitoring physical activity with feedback loops to LEAP! Rx Coaches and clinicians. Accessibility is optimized through community-based fitness centers that provide ready expertise and infrastructure at low cost in a community-based setting close to home.

### 1.5 Dissemination and Scalability Potential

The LEAP! Rx Program is highly scalable across broad, real-world settings. The program requires modest specialization in staff, with low training and space requirements for existing fitness centers. Program stakeholders (such as health systems and fitness centers) usually have existing communication channels and community leadership that can enhance reputation and program reach. As an early adopter and driver in the program’s design, the YMCA has experience scaling similar national programs[49]. Incentives exist on every level to support sustainability: patients are motivated to improve their health and well-being; physicians need solutions for health behavior management to reduce chronic disease risk; mission-based community-based organizations (such as the YMCA) advance their mission; exercise trainers increase client referrals; and health system and payers are provided with a cost-effective tool to induce health behavior change and ultimately reduce healthcare costs. The program meets core features that define high dissemination potential: it is superior to existing models, provides value to its multi-level stakeholders, applies to broad settings and locations, has visible leadership and communication channels, and strong incentives exist at every level of deployment.

### 1.6 Summary

Currently, the healthcare system is not sufficiently capitalizing on the potential of lifestyle changes to reduce the population burden of chronic disease in older adults. Simply encouraging older adults to adopt healthier lifestyles is not enough. Innovation is needed to develop interventions to maximize successful aging through strategies to sustain older adults’ health and function.[50] Hence, there is a critical need to translate the latest evidence-based approaches into broad public health benefits. The primary goals of this study are to provide rigorous evidence that a multi-level approach (See Figure 1.) improves important health outcomes in older adults, with benefits on multiple levels: 

*   **1)** To patients who need guidance on evidence-based strategies to maintain optimal health through proven programs that help initiate and sustain behavior changes;

*   **2)** To healthcare providers who need practical tools to promote prevention strategies in older adults;

*   **3)** To healthcare systems needing proven options for preventative health programs and guidance on leveraging them (i.e., referral process, links to community-based programs).

![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/F1.medium.gif)

[Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/F1)

Figure 1. The LEAP! Rx Program supports the clinician-patient relationship
The clinician prescribes the program of coaching, training, and monitoring in a community based fitness center that feeds easily-digested metrics back to the clinician to encourage long term compliance.

Additionally, if this approach reduces the burden of chronic disease, it could have significant public health and economic consequences. Based on emerging data in the field of cognitive aging, half of AD cases are attributable to modifiable risk factors, and even a modest 10 – 25% reduction in these risk factors is estimated to cut the number of adults in the US with AD by nearly 500,000 cases. [51] Thus, optimizing lifestyle strategies to maximize their effect will likely translate into sizeable public health gains.

### 1.7 Hypotheses

The goals of this study are to: 

*   **1.** Examine the efficacy of the LEAP! Rx Program on increasing and sustaining cardiorespiratory fitness. We hypothesize that the LEAP! Rx Program will increase and maintain cardiorespiratory fitness (peak oxygen consumption [VO2peak]) at both 12 weeks (after the initiation phase) and 52 weeks (after the maintenance phase).

*   **2.** Test the effect of the LEAP! Rx Program on outcome measures of chronic disease risk factors, including insulin resistance, body composition, and lipids. We hypothesize that LEAP! Rx Program will improve an individual’s metabolic profile with measurable benefits in specific secondary outcome measures of HOMA2, fat mass, lean mass, and cholesterol (total, LDL, HDL).

*   **3.** Explore the implementation and scalability of the program for clinicians and patients and package best practices in implementation manuals. Implementing the program on a broader scale requires both patient and clinician satisfaction. To assess the patient experience, we will monitor dropout and assess satisfaction, quality-of-life, and self-efficacy at baseline, week 12, and week 52. In addition, we will survey and interview clinicians to assess barriers to use and perceived usefulness while monitoring adoption rates and referral patterns.

## 2.0 Methods

Two hundred twenty participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to the LEAP! Rx Program vs. a standard of care control group (Figure 2). The standard of care group will receive educational materials at entry – mimicking the current standard of care for encouraging health behavior change – and will provide outcome measures parallel to those of the active intervention group. After completion of the outcome measures, this group will have access to the LEAP! Rx Program (to enhance recruitment efforts; no outcome measures). We will compare outcomes from the active intervention group with the standard of care group to test the efficacy of the LEAP! Rx Program to: 

1.  Increase cardiorespiratory fitness at both 12 and 52 weeks (co-primary outcome measures)

2.  Impact on chronic disease risk factors: insulin resistance (HOMA2), body composition (increased lean mass, reduced fat mass), and lipids (reduced total cholesterol / LDL).

![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/F2.medium.gif)

[Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/F2)

Figure 2. Study flow

### 2.1 Inclusion/Exclusion

The inclusion/exclusion criteria (Table 1) are intentionally broad to provide a generalizable cohort of older adults and encourage clinician referral of participants who the clinician believes would benefit from increased physical activity. Participants will be clinician-referred or self-referred, ambulatory, underactive, and 65 years and older without a recent history of stroke or coronary artery disease.

View this table:
[Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/T1)

Table 1. Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

### 2.2 Referral and Recruitment Process

#### 2.2.1 Referral Process

We will recruit participants by two modes: direct referral from clinicians (i.e., physicians, nurse practitioners) of the Hospital or the general population via typical University of Kansas Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center (KU ADRC) recruitment methods such as advertisement, flyers, etc. Our referral process for clinicians will be embedded in the electronic health record (EHR) as a “prescription” so that the LEAP! Rx Program is ordered as part of a seamless clinical workflow and through the KU ADRC recruitment division activities. This process will include 1) developing precise, computable phenotypes to identify potential participants, 2) flagging these potentially eligible participants for providers, and 3) activating the prescription from the health system to the KU ADRC and on to the YMCA enrollment system. The electronic prescription or recruitment division referral will be routed to the KU ADRC. The study staff will make initial contact and complete a phone screen with the patient to determine eligibility. Eligible patients will be scheduled for baseline testing. A clinician or physician clearance to exercise will be required for self-referred participants.

#### 2.2.2 Clinician Role

Clinicians will “prescribe” the program to potentially eligible patients via an electronic prescription, just like other orders in the EHR. After enrolling a patient, referring clinicians will be asked to have brief discussions during routinely scheduled follow-up visits to review attendance and physical activity data. This data will be provided to referring clinicians through the EHR and by hard copy (patient participants will be given paper reports to take to their clinician so they are not required to navigate within the EHR to the reports). Evidence suggests that a brief 3 – 4 minute office discussion is meaningful without adding a significant burden.[52]

#### 2.2.3 Phone Screening

KU study staff will contact referred participants to assess eligibility, obtain permission to examine their health records and perform a Telephone Assessment of Physical Activity[53] to ensure participants are sedentary or underactive.

#### 2.2.4 Enrollment and Randomization

After completing the phone screen, eligible participants will be given a standard set of informational materials on the study. If the potential participant is interested in participating in the study, the LEAP! Rx Study Coordinator will schedule the baseline visit. Baseline testing will be scheduled with a goal of completion within two weeks. Upon successful completion of baseline testing, the LEAP! Rx Study Coordinator will randomize participants to either the active intervention or the standard of care 1-year wait-list control group (1:1 ratio). Randomization tables (with random block sizes) will be developed in SAS and uploaded to the data capture system to securely allocate participants to the treatment arm.

#### 2.2.5 Blinding

Psychometricians and Exercise physiologists who perform assessments will be blinded to intervention groups. The primary investigator will be unblinded to perform safety assessments and address safety concerns or adverse events but will not be involved in acquiring outcome measures.

### 2.3 Control Group: Standard of Care

The standard of care group has been designed to represent the current standard of clinical care. Individuals randomized to this group will only be given educational information on the benefits of a healthy lifestyle at baseline. Participants in this group will not be discouraged from exercising independently. However, we will ask that they agree not to join a YMCA or hire a personal trainer during this time. Current data[44, 54, 55] suggest that education only does not result in significant and sustained physical activity changes.

Participants randomized to the standard-of-care group will be informed they have been randomized to a 52-week “waiting list,” during which time they will complete all outcome measures parallel to the active intervention group. All participants (both active and standard of care) will receive the same educational materials at the enrollment visit. After completing outcome assessments at 52 weeks, the standard-of-care participants will be offered access to the full LEAP! Rx Program at no cost, including membership and coaching fees, to enhance recruitment and minimize dropout from this group. Outcome assessments will not be repeated during their participation in the LEAP! Rx Program.

Cross-over does not threaten internal validity as the study is designed to assess the value of the LEAP! Rx Program over and above the effects of standard of care (i.e., education only). Control participants can exercise independently (though no structured assistance is provided for this comparison group).

### 2.4 Intervention Group: LEAP! Rx Program

The LEAP! Rx Program is packaged to be delivered at any fitness center. For this study, we will use local YMCA sites.The LEAP! Rx Program represents a “package” consisting of: 

1.  A dedicated LEAP! Rx Coach (i.e., personal trainer)

2.  m-Health objective monitoring of daily physical activity

3.  Smart Aging Educational Curriculum

4.  Group exercise opportunities

Additional details about the LEAP!Rx program can be found in Supplemental Material 1.

### 2.5 Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

In March 2020, exercise facilities were closed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Many facilities remained closed until the end of May 2020. During this time, participants were able to continue meeting with their LEAP! Rx Coach virtually over Zoom to complete exercise sessions at home. In addition, in-person education curriculum sessions were discontinued and only offered online. After May 2020, those participants who were comfortable and interested in resuming in-person exercise did.

### 2.6 Study Events

#### 2.6.1 Overview

Physiologic adaptations to the LEAP! Rx Program will be assessed with cardiorespiratory fitness testing, physical function assessment, body composition measures, laboratory tests, health surveys, and cognitive testing (Table 2). Study assessments will be completed in one appointment visit lasting approximately two hours.

#### 2.6.2 Baseline, Week 12, and Week 52 Outcome Assessments

Baseline, 12-week, and 52-week outcome assessments are identical and included in Table 2. Briefly, consented participants will have fasting phlebotomy and be provided a snack. Trained research staff will collect demographic information, health history, and medications at baseline (and update at follow up visits). Blood pressure (measured three times in a sitting position), height, and weight will be assessed each time. Trained staff will complete DEXA scanning and cardiorespiratory fitness testing with graded maximal exercise testing. Participants will perform < 2-hour session of surveys (NIH Toolbox Emotion, diet survey, and Veggie Meter®) and brief cognitive evaluation (NIH Toolbox Cognitive). These procedures will take approximately two hours to complete in a single visit. An accelerometer will be placed on the participant at the first visit and removed at the second visit unless extenuating circumstances arise. In this case, the accelerometer will be mailed.

#### 2.6.3 Cardiorespiratory Fitness

Our primary outcome is cardiorespiratory fitness as measured by peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak) during treadmill testing at 12 and 52 weeks compared to baseline. This co-primary outcome will test our hypothesis that the LEAP! Rx Program will increase VO2 peak after the intensive Empowerment phase (12 weeks) and remain increased over baseline during the Lifestyle phase (52 weeks). We view VO2peak as a physiological “assay” to prove that our intended health behavior change (increased physical activity as measured by accelerometry and survey) induces meaningful physiological benefits.

VO2 peak is the standard, quantitative measure of cardiorespiratory fitness. VO2 peak is closely related to physical activity level[56] and is a strong predictor of many health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, cognitive decline, neurological disease, inflammation, and, most importantly, all-cause mortality.[16-18, 23-25, 57-68] It thus represents a significant health outcome and target for therapeutic interventions.

VO2 peak is measured during a symptom-limited graded treadmill test. The test is led by an exercise physiologist and supervised by a clinician using the Bruce protocol.[69] Participants are attached to a 12-lead electrocardiograph and wear a non-rebreathing facemask to assess heart rate, blood pressure, and expired air (oxygen, carbon dioxide) using a Parvomedics system.

VO2 peak is the highest observed value of oxygen utilization during the test.[70, 71] American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines[56] are used to determine whether the exercise test should be terminated early and include ST-segment depression of more than 2mm, nervous system symptoms (ataxia, dizziness), sustained ventricular tachycardia, and chest discomfort. We will also assess whether maximal effort is achieved, as defined by achieving 3 of the 4 following criteria: a plateau in oxygen consumption with an increase in exercise intensity, a respiratory exchange ratio (RER) ≥1.0, a maximal heart rate within 90% age-predicted maximum, or volitional fatigue.[72]

#### 2.6.4 Physical Activity Measures

The goal of the LEAP! Rx Program is to increase physical activity, specifically moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, to induce physiologic benefits (increased VO2 peak). Thus, we will also assess the underlying behavior change with both accelerometry and surveys.

##### Accelerometry

We will use wrist-worn triaxial accelerometers (Actigraph GT9X, Pensacola, FL) during three 1-week periods (baseline, week 12, and week 52). We have chosen wrist-worn devices (as opposed to hip or thigh devices) based on our experience with both wrist and hip-worn devices[73] and recent literature relevant to older adults.[74] Wrist-worn accelerometers are comparable to hip-worn when assessing moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) AND are associated with better adherence.[74] Triaxial accelerometers are more thoroughly validated to provide a research-based outcome measure than consumer products (such as the m-Health pedometers used for self- and clinician monitoring). Our accelerometer protocol was adapted from the NHANES study[75] and we have successfully collected data from over 100 early AD patients and cognitively normal older adults.[73]

The accelerometer will be worn on the non-dominant wrist during a consecutive 7 day period. Participants will be instructed to wear the unit 24 hours a day. The unit is waterproof and can be worn while bathing and swimming. Total daily activity (sum of all activity during waking hours), intensity of daily activity (divide total activity by the time of all nonzero epochs) and percent of day spent in non-activity will be calculated using ActiLife software{Crouter, 2011 #14} including the selection of proper epochs (1 minute{Rowlands, 2019 #15}), length of activity bouts, intensity thresholds, transformation of data, and missing data imputation.{Catellier, 2005 #16}We will consider days with > 10 hours of wear to be valid days and require at least four valid days (including 1 weekend day) of observation.{King, 2011 #17}

##### The International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)

survey will be administered to assess the participant’s habitual level of physical activity. IPAQ is a 27 item measure developed to assess levels of physical activity in older adults. IPAQ is a robust measure (unaffected by seasonal bias) designed to capture various physical activities in older adults. This instrument is a valid and reliable method to assess changes in response to interventions.[76–78]

#### 2.6.5 Physical Function

The YMCA LEAP! Rx Coaches will perform the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), a well-known test of aerobic endurance[79] and has been shown to capture training responses.[80] The LEAP!Rx Coaches will administer the 6MWT during the first intervention session at the YMCA and again at Weeks 12 and 52.

#### 2.6.6 Body Composition

Participants will have their body composition using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA, Lunar Prodigy, version 11.2068, Madison, WI) to determine fat-free mass, fat mass, and percent body fat. DEXA uses very low X-ray doses (0.02mREM), corresponding to less than several hours of background exposure, and detects changes in body composition on the order of 1.6-3.8%.[81, 82] Participants will be weighed with a digital scale accurate to ±0.1 kg in a standard hospital gown after attempting to void and remove jewelry.

#### 2.6.7 Laboratory measures

A fasting blood draw (∼ 35mL total) will be performed to generate plasma and serum for biomarker analysis. Plasma and serum will be stored at −80C until further analysis by the study team, including assessment of glucose, insulin, lipids, and related metabolic biomarkers.

#### 2.6.7 Patient-Centered Measures

Patient experience, psychosocial outcomes, attendance and dropout rates, satisfaction, quality of life, and self-efficacy will be assessed at baseline and 12 and 52 weeks.

##### NIH Toolbox Emotion Battery

The NIH Toolbox Emotion Battery {Babakhanyan, 2018 #18} includes a variety of measures that will be used to assess participants’ responses to the LEAP! Rx Program. The battery consists of validated measures of General Life Satisfaction and Self-Efficacy. Additionally, it includes several relevant mental health measures such as Positive Affect, Sadness, Emotional Support, and Perceived Stress.

##### Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL)

refers to how health impacts an individual’s ability to function and perceived well-being in physical, mental and social domains. The Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) health survey is the most commonly used HR-QOL measure. The SF-36 health survey is a widely used health status questionnaire comprised of 36 items selected from a larger pool of items used by RAND in the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS){Ware, 1992 #19}.

##### Dropout, Adherence, and Attendance

We will monitor dropout rates. Adherence will be the number of exercise sessions completed (center-based training, group sessions, and home-based sessions), the number of scheduled Exercise Training sessions completed, and the number of LEAP!Rx Coaching sessions attended. Participants will maintain paper-based logs to record their home-based exercise and group exercise attendance. LEAP!Rx Coaches will enter data from the paper-based logs into a central database maintained by KU staff via tablets. Additionally, attendance at scheduled LEAP! Rx education classes (monthly), exercise training sessions, and LEAP!Rx Coaching sessions will be recorded by YMCA staff and entered into the central database. Attendance data will be shared with Referring Clinicians.

##### Exit Surveys

We will also perform a short semi-structured exit survey on all patients who complete the study (at week 52 visit) to assess their general experience, perceived benefits, and suggestions for improvement. Participants who drop out will be interviewed by phone to ascertain their reasons for dropping out, perceived barriers, suggestions for program improvement, and general feedback.

#### 2.6.8 Clinician Measures

We aim to create a clinician tool for the effortless “prescription” of the LEAP! Rx Program. In return, the clinician will receive simple, easily digestible metrics on patient progress (attendance and physical activity data) to support the clinician-patient relationship.

Referral patterns will be assessed per clinic type and clinician by examining the number of referrals, timing of referral, and clinical indication for referral. Examining the time and source of referrals will provide us with insight into adoption rates whether program growth is organic vs. driven by our efforts to engage clinicians and whether these rates of adoption are variable across clinics.

Referring Clinicians will provide informed consent to participate in email surveys every 4 months. Short email surveys (< 5mins; via REDCap) will be sent to Referring Clinicians every 4 months to assess 1) the referral process, 2) perceived barriers to use, 3) perceived usefulness to their patients, patient health, and health care practice, 4) burden including monitoring of physical activity via the EHR and patient-provided reports. Face-to-face interviews will be conducted with referring clinicians at the end of the study to assess their overall experience.

#### 2.6.8 Other outcomes

##### NIH Toolbox Cognitive Function

Although not a primary aim of this project due to power issues, we will collect basic cognitive function data using a brief battery derived from the NIH toolbox. {Weintraub, 2013 #20} This information may prove useful in powering a larger future study if needed.

##### Diet intake survey

As greater attention to one’s lifestyle may lead to changes in the composition of our participant’s diets, we will assess changes in diet during the intervention as an exploratory outcome. Diet is strongly linked to diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and inflammation, while certain diets have been linked with AD and dementia outcomes. [83–86] Diet intake will be assessed by using the NCI Diet History Questionnaire II.

##### Skin Carotenoids

Skin carotenoids will be measured using a non-invasive optical biomarker assessment tool, the VEGGIE METERTM (Longevity Link Corporation), collected at the baseline visit and the final visit. {Radtke, 2021 #21} This tool uses reflection spectroscopy to measure skin carotenoid levels, which can then be associated with fruit and vegetable consumption. The participant will place an index finger in the probe for 10 seconds while the skin tissue is being measured. Three measurements will be taken for an average score.

### 2.7 Data Management

Study data will be collected and managed using a web-based, electronic data capture tools hosted on a secure, HIPAA compliant server. Our institution hosts different platforms, including Velos eResearch and REDCap, which provide validated data entry and audit trails. Data will be collected on standard source documents or via direct data entry into REDCap. The institution ensures data security by managing all data on a secure server that has role-based access that is password protected. All files that are modified are backed up daily, with complete backups of the server on a weekly basis. All data are stored in a HIPAA compliant manner

### 2.8 Sample Size

The primary goal of this study is to provide definitive evidence of the benefits of the LEAP! Rx Program on cardiorespiratory fitness. Thus, the primary analysis of our primary measure – VO2peak at both 12 and 52 weeks – is the basis for the sample size of our study. Our primary analysis is an intent-to-treat comparison of active vs. control groups using an LMM model of repeated measures of VO2peak at initial measurement, 12 weeks later, and after 52 weeks. Study power is based on a two-degree-of-freedom test of our priori-identified single primary outcome measure (VO2peak) at two time points. We will use a contrast matrix to test both time points simultaneously, so no multiplicity adjustment will be needed. For all analyses, the type I error rate will be set to α=0.05, and we will use a contrast matrix to conduct the F-test of our primary research hypothesis, which notably mimics a two-sided testing paradigm to even further protect against spurious results.

We anticipate the effect size (mean difference divided by the SD) to be half the effect of that observed in our 6-month trial[54] given the intensity of exercise will likely be lower than observed in a tightly controlled research protocol. Additionally, we anticipate a 20% decrease in this effect size at the 52-week endpoint compared to 12 week effect. We assume that the 12- and 52-week time point results will be positively correlated; thus, the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis of no group difference at both 12 weeks (Rejl2 wks) and 52 weeks (Rej52 wks) is Pr(Rejl2 wks ∩ Rej52 wks) = Pr(Rejl2 wks|Rej52 wks) Pr (Rej52 wks)

We use this form of the joint distribution because we anticipate the effect size to be lower for the 52-week time point; hence our estimates of power are conservative. To estimate the joint probability of rejecting both we anticipate that if the effect is sustained (i.e., Pr [Rej52 wks], then the intervention group is highly likely to have increased VO2peak at the 12-week time point. Thus, under the condition Rej52 wks, the conditional probability of Rejl2 wks, or Pr (Rejl2 wks|Rej52 wks) should be high (∼1.0). Therefore, Pr(Rejl2 wks|Rej52 wks) Pr (Rej52 wks) ≈ Pr (Rej52 wks). Using this, we can approximate the power based on data for a single time point.

In the TEAM study, we observed an effect size of 1.2 in the exercise intervention groups.[54] We conservatively assume the intervention effect will be approximately half that (0.6), and as indicated above we anticipate the 52-week time point to have a 20% decrease for the sustained effect, reducing the anticipated effect size to 0.48. With that our sample of 110 subjects per group will have over 88% power while allowing for 20% attrition (leaving approximately 88 subjects per group). With even smaller effect sizes (e.g., 0.45) this sample size will still have 84% power (nQuery Advisor® 7.0, 1995-2007).

### 2.9 Outcomes and Planned Statistical Analyses

The primary aim of this study is to examine the efficacy of the LEAP! Rx Program on increasing and sustaining cardiorespiratory fitness. We hypothesize that the LEAP! Rx Program will increase and maintain cardiorespiratory fitness (peak oxygen consumption [VO2peak]) at both 12 weeks (after the initiation phase) and 52 weeks (after the maintenance phase; co-primary outcome measure). VO2peak is a vital health outcome linked to mortality and age-related diseases. VO2peak is a physiological “assay” to demonstrate meaningful health behavior change. We also expect increased moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (measured by accelerometry and survey) as the mechanism that results in VO2peak benefits.

The second aim of this study is to test the effect of the LEAP! Rx Program on secondary outcome measures of chronic disease risk factors, including insulin resistance, body composition, and lipids. We hypothesize that LEAP! Rx Program will improve an individual’s metabolic profile with measurable benefits in specific secondary outcome measures of HOMA2, fat mass, lean mass, and cholesterol (total, LDL, HDL).

Finally, this study aims to assess the program’s implementation and scalability for clinicians and patients and package best practices in implementation manuals. Implementing the program on a broader scale requires both patient and clinician satisfaction. To assess the patient experience, we will monitor dropout and assess satisfaction, quality-of-life, and self-efficacy at baseline, week 12, and week 52. To best reach our goal of an effortless “prescription” and meaningful, easily-consumed metrics feeding back to the clinician, we will survey and interview clinicians to assess barriers to use and perceived usefulness while monitoring adoption rates and referral patterns. Deliverables include training manuals for LEAP! Coaches, Smart Aging Curriculum, and a Strategy Guide for engaging healthcare providers and health systems. Additional statistical analysis details are available in Supplemental Material 2.

## 3.0 Conclusion

The ultimate goal of the LEAP! Rx study aims to create a scalable and cost-effective program for clinicians and their patients that reduces the risk of chronic disease by inducing lifestyle behavior change. The LEAP! Rx program begins with and supports the clinician-patient relationship with the intent to provide clinicians with a new tool composed of 1) a prescription, 2) a framework for delivering the prescription, and 3) metrics to assess effects on behavior. Recruitment of participants occurs through clinicians and is facilitated by an electronic prescription through the EHR that seamlessly integrates with the clinician’s workflow.

A primary goal of this study is to test the sustained effects of the physical activity maintenance phase. To do so, we have identified our primary outcome of increasing both 12-week (intensive phase) and 52-week (maintenance phase) levels of cardiorespiratory fitness. This co-primary outcome approach ensures the program’s effect is one that both acutely boosts and chronically sustains cardiorespiratory fitness. We use several methods to support continued behavior maintenance in real-world settings (i.e., motivational interviewing, m-Health for real-time feedback, community-based centers, and regular follow-up) to overcome barriers to sustained behavior change. The approach of the LEAP!Rx study was designed to realign common resources to allow scaling the program to essentially any staffed fitness center. We draw on our YMCA’s experience in scaling other interventions (Diabetes Prevention Program) and technology that is soon be ubiquitous (i.e. smartphones or wearable computing). If effective in this rigorous clinical trial, we will deliver an innovative program nationally to improve population health.

## Data Availability

This is a protocol manuscript. No human subjects data is reported.

### Abbreviations

LEAP! Rx Program
:   Lifestyle Empowerment for Alzheimer’s Prevention
EHR
:   Electronic Health Record
m-Health
:   mobile-health
AD
:   Alzheimer’s Disease
KU ADRC
:   University of Kansas Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center
IPAQ
:   International Physical Activity Questionnaire
6MWT
:   6-Minute Walk Test
DEXA
:   dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
HR-QOL
:   Health-related quality of life

## Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute on Aging R01AG052954-01. Additional support was provided by P30 AG072973, the Clinical Translation Science Unit (UL1 TR002366), The Ann and Gary Dickinson Family Charitable Foundation, John and Marny Sherman, Brad and Libby Bergman, and GAP. T32 AG078114 supports Dr. Key.

## NCT Registration

NCT03253341

## Supplemental Material 1

### 2.4.1 LEAP! Rx Coach

Each fitness center will designate a LEAP!Rx Coach. The program design is based on the Behavioral Choice Theory. [87] LEAP! Rx Coaches will use motivational interviewing to assess readiness for change, motivations, goals, and barriers to physical activity. LEAP! Rx Coaches will have the following responsibilities: 

*   Function as the primary point of contact for study staff and participants

*   Set individualized goals, monitor m-Health physical activity levels, review progress, and provide counseling on exercise, nutrition, and body weight.

*   Lead exercise training sessions for supervision and training in resistance and aerobic exercise

*   Attend monthly study meetings with area LEAP! Rx Coaches and study staff

### 2.4.2 LEAP! Coach Training and Qualifications

LEAP!Rx Coaches will have a personal trainer or fitness instructor certification from a nationally recognized organization. In addition, LEAP! Rx Coaches will be required to complete the 4 phase training of ACE Integrated Fitness Training Model certification. This ACE certification prepares Coaches to deliver custom, individualized exercise programs with goals ranging from simple function to health, fitness, and elite performance.

### 2.4.3 Training Fidelity Plan

To enhance the fidelity of the delivery of the LEAP! Rx Program across fitness centers and to prepare LEAP! Rx Coaches for the broad health issues of an older population: 

*   LEAP! Rx Coaches will undergo a training program conducted by study personnel. The basis of this training will include a manual of procedures (MOP) modified from the YMCA’s recently developed “Coaching Connection” manual. This includes training on theories of behavior change and techniques for motivational interviewing. In the event of staff turnover, new LEAP! Rx Coaches will be trained individually by study personnel.

*   LEAP! Rx Coaches will be trained in the exercise protocol and receive a manual developed over our several previous YMCA-based exercise trials. The manual will outline proper procedures for safe aerobic and resistance training progression and instruct on data collection and adverse event reporting.

*   Ongoing training will be supported by close communication between LEAP! Rx Coaches and study staff. The LEAP! Rx study coordinator will lead monthly meetings bringing together the LEAP! Rx Coaches from the YMCA centers will discuss the program with study staff and troubleshoot any problems.

*   We will intermittently (monthly) monitor coaches for protocol compliance and professionalism. Booster training sessions will be developed and employed as needed.

### 2.4.4 Exercise Training Program

The LEAP! Rx exercise program consists of an intensive 12-week Empowerment Phase followed by a 40-week Lifestyle Phase (See Supplemental Table 1.). The overall goal of the training is to meet current recommendations of 150 minutes a week of aerobic exercise (over 3 to 5 days a week) and 2 days a week of resistance exercise.[88, 89] To facilitate independence and self-reliance, personal training supervision will decrease in frequency throughout the 12-week Empowerment phase followed by monthly sessions during the Lifestyle phase.

Participants will be expected to increasingly exercise independently (home or at the YMCA) to meet the overall goal. The gradual introduction and progressively increasing volume and intensity of exercise are designed to build self-reliance.

LEAP! Rx Coaches will supervise in-person exercise training sessions. Coaches will also work with participants to set individualized goals and monitor progress toward those goals. One-on-one coaching will occur as part of the exercise training during the Empowerment phase and monthly afterward. Coaches will work to identify barriers and provide guidance for achieving the participant’s physical activity, fitness, nutrition, and other LEAP! Rx goals. LEAP! Rx Coaches will encourage participation in monthly educational sessions and group exercise opportunities.

In the event of an emergent situation, individuals may need to exercise from home with limited monitoring. Study staff will provide publicly or privately available exercise videos online and instructive handouts and will make as many check-in calls as possible. Videos will be scientifically vetted or come from highly reputable sources (e.g. AHA or ACSM) and will attempt to support the existing protocol as much as possible. Online platforms will be used to communicate with participants using a variety of means, including email and phone, as well as standard computer and phone apps that could provide a platform for face-to-face communication. These apps may include FaceTime, Skype, Zoom, or Microsoft Teams or similar apps. If these are used, we will do so on consultation with investigators who have ongoing telehealth research and apply their standard procedures for privacy. Handouts will encourage exercises that are consistent with public health recommendations and publications. Check-in call frequency will vary based on the situation, but we will target a biweekly call.

### 2.4.5 Empowerment Phase

The Empowerment phase comprises 12 weeks of supervised and unsupervised exercise training sessions. Aerobic exercise duration will be gradually increased over six weeks to a goal of 150 minutes per week. Exercise will be primarily supervised in the Empowerment phase and follow our protocol used in NIH-funded trials [19, 90] to successfully introduce and increase the volume of exercise in older adults. Participants will perform 60 total minutes of aerobic exercise in the first week and increase that volume by about 18 minutes per week to achieve 150 minutes per week by 6 weeks. Coaches will supervise during this titration period two times per week from Weeks 1-6 and one time per week in Weeks 8, 10 & 12. By Week 6, participants will walk, cycle, or elliptical for 150 minutes a week over 4-5 days at a level deemed “somewhat hard” or 3 to 5 (out of 10) on the modified Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion scale (RPE). [91] Use of an exertion rating as a proxy for a target heart rate zone decreases complexity, allows greater individualization in the context of bradycardic drugs and is a validated method of exercise prescription. Participants will be taught how to rate their exertion levels based on their heart rate during supervised sessions.

Participants will also be encouraged to perform resistance exercises twice a week. Resistance exercise will target the major muscle groups (e.g., pectorals, rhomboids, and latissimus dorsi, biceps, triceps, quadriceps, hamstrings, calves). During Weeks 1-6, LEAP! Rx Coaches will work with participants to identify exercises and machines that are comfortable for the participant. Resistance will be set using the RPE to a resistance that is “somewhat hard” (RPE 3-5) to lift ten times. RPE is a valid method for gauging resistance training intensity like aerobic training.[92] Coaches will counsel participants on modifying exercises and resistance as participants increase strength.

Participants will be encouraged to attend group exercise classes to meet the 150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise and two days per week of resistance training. Silver Sneakers classes will be promoted as a good choice for participants.

### 2.4.6 Lifestyle Phase

The Lifestyle phase will consist of 40 weeks of once-monthly (every four weeks) exercise training sessions. Contact with the LEAP! Rx Coach will encourage adherence to the exercise program, assure the progression of exercise routines, and allow continual review of progress toward goals and monitoring of the m-Health data. These one-on-one training sessions will include continued goal-setting sessions to review goals, progress towards goals, and discuss other lifestyle factors such as nutrition, body weight, smoking cessation, etc. The goal of the Lifestyle phase is to continue to safely challenge the participant whiRx le allowing greater independence in the timing and location of exercise.

### 2.4.7 Mobile-Health (m-Health) Monitoring

The LEAP! Rx Program will leverage emerging m-Health technology to objectively measure physical activity and provide this data to the participant (self-monitoring), LEAP! Coaches, and ultimately the referring clinician (i.e., physical activity as a vital sign). Each participant will be given an m-Health monitoring device worn on the wrist (Garmin Vivofit2, Garmin, Olathe, KS). Devices store up to 30 days of data and have a battery life of 1 year. Data from these devices are collected through smartphone, computer or wireless access points (Garmin Vivohub2) that will be installed at each of the YMCA sites and the participants smartphone (if available). Simply walking by a wireless access point will convey this data to our centralized database; thus, personal smartphones and computers are not required. LEAP! Rx Coaches will access an online customized dashboard (MyInertia) that provides them with access to their participants’ data. LEAP! Rx Coaches will either print a monthly hard copy or electronically view the physical activity report for their participants so that smartphones and computers are not required to access their data. At the end of study participation, LEAP! Rx Coaches will train the participants, whenever possible, to access their data through a device (i.e., smartphone or tablet) or on their home computer so they can continue using the devices.

### 2.4.8 Group Exercise Sessions

Each YMCA has a variety of group exercise opportunities available to YMCA members. Participants will be encouraged to attend group exercise classes to augment their individualized, supervised exercise training sessions or home-based independent exercise. Group exercise opportunities will be categorized into Beginner, Intermediate, and Advanced classes so that participants can appropriately progress their exercise volume and intensity. Beginner-level courses will be encouraged during the initiation phase, Intermediate during weeks 12 to 24, and Advanced during weeks 25 to 52. LEAP! Rx Coaches will assist in identifying classes that will effectively fulfill aerobic and resistance exercise goals.

### 2.4.9 Smart Aging Educational Curriculum

The Smart Aging Educational Curriculum will be delivered in person at the KU Clinical Research Center by KU ADRC study staff with an alternate option for viewing online. The overall goal of the curriculum will be to initiate and sustain behavior change and provide a framework for lifestyle enhancement. Although each session will include some didactic information, the sessions will primarily focus on group discussion and goal-setting. The Smart Aging Curriculum has been developed and deployed at the KU ADRC. We will use a local media company to create and translate the existing KU ADRC programming into consumer-friendly and professionally packaged materials. To support the delivery of the program, YMCA staff will receive training materials. Sessions will include online videos guided completion of a workbook with a LEAP! Rx Coach that: 1) asks participants to reflect on their habits indicated by monitoring and changes with age, 2) sets realistic and measurable goals, describes expectations for change in behaviors and barriers to making change, 3) evaluates perceived benefits of increasing activity, reinforces strategies for rewarding behavior change and enjoyable activities to pursue, ratings of confidence in the ability to make changes, 4) tips for ways to change behavior (generic and targeted to individual habits/barriers). The educational and goal-setting piece is based on Social Cognitive Theory and Behavioral Choice Theory concepts. [87]

View this table:
[Supplemental Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/T2)

Supplemental Table 1. LEAP! Rx Program Events

View this table:
[Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/T3)

Table 2. Study Assessments

View this table:
[Table 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/07/31/2024.07.29.24311181/T4)

Table 3: Outcome Measures and their Duration

## Supplemental Material 2

### 2.9.1 Aim 1

Descriptive statistics will be generated for all measures. For continuous measures this will include the mean, standard deviation, percentiles, and range; for categorical measures this will include frequencies and relative frequencies. Bivariate analyses comparing the two treatment groups will include visual inspection (e.g., box plots for continuous measures) and statistical tests such as the two-sample t-test, Pearson’s chi square test, or analogous nonparametric measures as indicated based on assessments of underlying assumptions (e.g., residual analysis for t-tests, expected cell counts for Pearson’s chi square tests).

The primary study measure, VO2 peak, will have repeated measures over time (baseline, week 12, and week 52). Thus, we will use linear mixed models (LMMs) for analysis. Estimated linear contrasts will assess change (baseline to 12 weeks **and** baseline to 52 weeks) in VO2 peak comparing active vs. control groups, providing a randomized, intent-to-treat comparison. Our primary research hypothesis (Aim 1) involves a two degree-of-freedom test. To conclude with our research hypothesis of a benefit at 12 weeks that is sustained at 52 weeks, a contrast matrix will be used to simultaneously test in a single statistical test that VO2peak is increased over baseline at both 12 weeks and at 52 weeks.

We will use a type I error rate of 0.05 for this single, simultaneous two degree-of-freedom comparison of the primary measure (F-test). Tests of secondary measures, hypotheses, and per protocol analyses (based on ≥80% adherence) will follow a similar LMM approach. Further, we will collect detailed medical history and medications (using well-developed methods) to account for these potential confounding variables. Specific attention will be paid to beta blockers and steroids and cardiovascular co-morbidities as potential modifiers given their known influence on our primary cardio-metabolic outcomes. As these factors can be initiated or changed during the trial, we will incorporate them as time-varying covariates within our approach of using the LMM approach proposed. Our initial strategy for these changes will be to add an indicator (time-varying) for whether their medication or co-morbidity was initiated, increased, or decreased. Since we have identified and controlled the type I error for our two primary assessments (via the single, simultaneous two-degree-of-freedom F-test), no further multiplicity adjustments for our measures specified a priori as secondary will be used. We will fully disclose the measures tested and their a priori classification as primary versus secondary when reporting our findings in the literature to control the type I error.

Analyses will be performed using statistical software such as SAS and R. LMMs will be assessed by residual analysis (predicted vs. residual plots, q-q plots, etc.), visual inspection of residuals, and comparison of estimated standard deviations across groups (for homogeneity of variance). Our model assessment will use alternative strategies (transformation, bootstrapping, etc.) if indicated.

### 2.9.2 Aim 2

The goal of Aim 2 is to test the effect of the LEAP! Rx Program on chronic disease risk factors, including insulin resistance (HOMA2), body composition, and lipids (total cholesterol, LDL / HDL). We hypothesize the LEAP! Rx Program will positively affect an individual’s metabolic profile with measurable benefits in insulin resistance, reduced fat mass / increased lean mass, and lipid status.

The secondary study measures for aim 2 include HOMA2, lean mass, fat mass, total cholesterol, HDL, and LDL at baseline, 12-, and 52-week time points; thus, similar analysis methods as in aim 1 will be used (LMMs). Assessments for these measures will examine change from baseline to 12 weeks and whether any benefits will be sustained at 52 weeks via a single statistical test. These two degree-of-freedom tests will better control the operating characteristics study-wide. For each measure, we will assess the corresponding LMM by residual analysis (predicted vs. residual plots, q-q plots, etc.), visually inspect residuals, and compare estimated standard deviations across groups (for homogeneity of variance). Alternative strategies (transformation, bootstrapping, etc.) will be used as indicated by these assessments.

### 2.9.3 Aim 3

Study Aim 3 is a developmental Aim; the goal of Aim 3 is to assess the implementation and scalability of the program for clinicians and patients and package best practices in implementation manuals.

Our ultimate goal is to produce a scalable program to be implemented through partnerships of health systems and community-based fitness centers, if we demonstrate clear health gains through aims 1 and 2. This requires both clinician and patient satisfaction. Thus, developmental aim 3 is focused on obtaining data and valuable feedback in implementing the program on a broader scale.

Patient-centered outcomes will also involve generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) at baseline, 12-, and 52-week time points. For continuous measures, the LMMs (a special case of the GLMMs) will suffice. In contrast, other more discrete-measured variables will require different model assumptions (such as the multinomial distribution with an ordinal logit function, similar to that for the clinician measures) such as with Likert-type measures. Model assessments will include residual analyses (to assess mean-to-variance relationships and whether they are in keeping with the exponential family distribution selected for the particular GLMMs) and observed versus expected comparisons. We will utilize the two degree-of-freedom testing paradigms previously described to assess for sustained benefit simultaneously and better control type I errors.

Clinician surveys will be assessed graphically by plotting our measures over time (connecting values across time by clinician). We will use repeated measures-capable analyses for these ordinal response measures, in particular the generalized linear mixed model. We will initially specify an ordinal logit function to analyze these data, but we will assess model fit and re-evaluate the model to fit the data structure accordingly. These models will include time to assess temporal changes in these measures.

Data and qualitative information from Aim 3 will be used to develop comprehensive packages to guide the implementation of the program and scale it to other health systems and community fitness centers. These implementation manuals will be modeled on those designed for the Diabetes Prevention Program. We will work closely with the YMCA, including LEAP! Rx YMCA Site Coordinator. The final product will not be YMCA-specific but will be designed to be scalable to any staffed fitness center. Manuals will include 1) Summary of Evidence and Research and 2) training manuals for LEAP! Coaches, 3) training to deliver the LEAP! Rx: A Guide to Smart Aging Curriculum; 4) Manual on leveraging m-Health monitoring; and 5) Strategy guide for engaging healthcare providers and health systems.

*   Received July 29, 2024.
*   Revision received July 29, 2024.
*   Accepted July 31, 2024.


*   © 2024, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

## References

1.  1.Aging, N.I.o., Growing Older in America: the Healthy and Retirement Study,  F. Karp, Editor. 2007, National Institutes of Health: Bethesda, MD.
    
    

2.  2.Maestas, N.,  K.J. Mullen, and  D. Powell, The Effect of Population Aging on Economic Growth, the Labor Force, and Productivity. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2023. 15(2): p. 306–32.
    
    

3.  3.Zheng, D.D., et al., Multimorbidity patterns and their relationship to mortality in the US older adult population. PLOS ONE, 2021. 16(1): p. e0245053.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

4.  4.Medina, L.,  S. Sabo, and  J. Vespa, Living longer: Historical and projected life expectancy in the United States, 1960 to 2060. 2020: US Department of Commerce, US Census Bureau Suitland, MD, USA.
    
    

5.  5.Bhatti, G.K., et al., Lifestyle Modifications and Nutritional Interventions in Aging-Associated Cognitive Decline and Alzheimer’s Disease. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 2020. 11.
    
    

6.  6.Nelson, M.E., et al., Physical activity and public health in older adults: recommendation from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2007. 39(8): p. 1435–45.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1249/mss.0b013e3180616aa2&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17762378&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000248581500028&link_type=ISI) 

7.  7.Balducci, S., et al., Effect of an intensive exercise intervention strategy on modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial: the Italian Diabetes and Exercise Study (IDES). Arch Intern Med, 2010. 170(20): p. 1794–803.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archinternmed.2010.380&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21059972&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000283937600011&link_type=ISI) 

8.  8.Knowler, W.C., et al., Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med, 2002. 346(6): p. 393–403.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa012512&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11832527&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000173686400002&link_type=ISI) 

9.  9.Donnelly, J.E., et al., Effects of a 16-month randomized controlled exercise trial on body weight and composition in young, overweight men and women: the Midwest Exercise Trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 2003. 163(11): p. 1343–1350.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archinte.163.11.1343&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12796071&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000183390600012&link_type=ISI) 

10. 10.Heath, G.W., et al., Community-based exercise and weight control: diabetes risk reduction and glycemic control in Zuni Indians. Am J Clin Nutr, 1991. 53(6 Suppl): p. 1642S–1646S.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiYWpjbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMDoiNTMvNi8xNjQyUyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

11. 11.Wadden, T.A.,  J.S. Tronieri, and  M.L. Butryn, Lifestyle modification approaches for the treatment of obesity in adults. American Psychologist, 2020. 75(2): p. 235–251.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1037/amp0000517&link_type=DOI) 

12. 12.Jakicic, J.M., et al., Physical Activity and Excess Body Weight and Adiposity for Adults. American College of Sports Medicine Consensus Statement. Translational Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, 2024. 9(4): p. e000266.
    
    

13. 13.Hagberg, J.M., et al., Effect of exercise training in 60- to 69-year-old persons with essential hypertension. Am J Cardiol, 1989. 64(5): p. 348–53.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0002-9149(89)90533-X&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2756880&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1989AG92200019&link_type=ISI) 

14. 14.Barbour, K.A. and  J.A. Blumenthal, Exercise training and depression in older adults. Neurobiology of Aging, 2005. 26(1, Supplement 1): p. 119–123.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.09.007&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16223547&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

15. 15.Singh, B., et al., Effectiveness of physical activity interventions for improving depression, anxiety and distress: an overview of systematic reviews. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2023. 57(18): p. 1203.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6ODoiYmpzcG9ydHMiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6MTA6IjU3LzE4LzEyMDMiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNy8zMS8yMDI0LjA3LjI5LjI0MzExMTgxLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

16. 16.Burns, J.M., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness and brain atrophy in early Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 2008. 71(3): p. 210–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1212/01.wnl.0000317094.86209.cb&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18625967&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

17. 17.Honea, R.A., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness and preserved medial temporal lobe volume in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord, 2009. 23(3): p. 188–97.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/WAD.0b013e31819cb8a2&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19812458&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000269909300003&link_type=ISI) 

18. 18.Vidoni, E.D., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness is associated with atrophy in Alzheimer’s and aging over 2 years. Neurobiol Aging, 2012. 33(8): p. 1624–32.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2011.03.016&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21531480&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000306070800012&link_type=ISI) 

19. 19.Watts, A., et al., A combined measure of vascular risk for white matter lesions. J Alzheimers Dis, 2015. 45(1): p. 187–93.
    
    

20. 20.Burns, J.M., et al., Peripheral insulin and brain structure in early Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 2007. 69(11): p. 1094–104.
    
    

21. 21.Burns, J.M., et al., Insulin is differentially related to cognitive decline and atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease and aging. Biochim Biophys Acta, 2012. 1822(3): p. 333–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.06.011&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21745566&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

22. 22.Morris, J.K., et al., Impaired glycemia increases disease progression in mild cognitive impairment. Neurobiol Aging, 2014. 35(3): p. 585–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.09.033&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24411018&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

23. 23.Lakka, T.A., et al., Cardiorespiratory Fitness and the Progression of Carotid Atherosclerosis in Middle-Aged Men. Annals of Internal Medicine, 2001. 134(1): p. 12–20.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-134-1-200101020-00008&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11187415&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000166043300002&link_type=ISI) 

24. 24.Blair, S.N., et al., Influences of cardiorespiratory fitness and other precursors on cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in men and women. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1996. 276(3): p. 205–210.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.1996.03540030039029&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8667564&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1996UW46900031&link_type=ISI) 

25. 25.Kurl, S., et al., Cardiorespiratory Fitness and the Risk for Stroke in Men. Archives of Internal Medicine, 2003. 163(14): p. 1682–1688.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archinte.163.14.1682&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12885683&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000184369900007&link_type=ISI) 

26. 26.Seals, D.R., et al., Effects of endurance training on glucose tolerance and plasma lipid levels in older men and women. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 1984. 252(5): p. 645–649.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.1984.03350050033022&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=6376837&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1984TB80400017&link_type=ISI) 

27. 27.Hughes, V.A., et al., Exercise increases muscle GLUT-4 levels and insulin action in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. Am J Physiol, 1993. 264(6 Pt 1): p. E855–E862.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8333511&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1993LL13200035&link_type=ISI) 

28. 28.Kirwan, J.P., et al., Endurance exercise training reduces glucose-stimulated insulin levels in 60- to 70-year-old men and women. J Gerontol, 1993. 48(3): p. M84–M90.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/geronj/48.3.M84&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8482816&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1993LA88900015&link_type=ISI) 

29. 29.Cox, J.H., et al., Effect of aging on response to exercise training in humans: skeletal muscle GLUT- 4 and insulin sensitivity. Journal of Applied Physiology, 1999. 86(6): p. 2019–2025.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10368369&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000080781400041&link_type=ISI) 

30. 30.Kahn, S.E., et al., Effect of exercise on insulin action, glucose tolerance, and insulin secretion in aging. Am J Physiol, 1990. 258(6 Pt 1): p. E937–E943.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2193534&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

31. 31.Houmard, J.A., et al., Effect of reduced training and training cessation on insulin action and muscle GLUT-4. Journal of Applied Physiology, 1996. 81(3): p. 1162–1168.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8889749&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1996VH30700018&link_type=ISI) 

32. 32.Ford, E.S., Does exercise reduce inflammation? Physical activity and C-reactive protein among U.S. adults. Epidemiology, 2002. 13(5): p. 561–8.
    
    

33. 33.Vingtdeux, V., et al., AMP-activated protein kinase signaling activation by resveratrol modulates amyloid-beta peptide metabolism. J Biol Chem, 2010. 285(12): p. 9100–13.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiamJjIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjExOiIyODUvMTIvOTEwMCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

34. 34.Vingtdeux, V., et al., Novel synthetic small-molecule activators of AMPK as enhancers of autophagy and amyloid-beta peptide degradation. FASEB J, 2011. 25(1): p. 219–31.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1096/fj.10-167361&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20852062&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000285869500020&link_type=ISI) 

35. 35.De Felice, F.G., et al., Protection of synapses against Alzheimer’s-linked toxins: insulin signaling prevents the pathogenic binding of Abeta oligomers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2009. 106(6): p. 1971–6.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoicG5hcyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMDoiMTA2LzYvMTk3MSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

36. 36.Gasparini, L., et al., Stimulation of beta-amyloid precursor protein trafficking by insulin reduces intraneuronal beta-amyloid and requires mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling. J Neurosci, 2001. 21(8): p. 2561–70.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6Njoiam5ldXJvIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjIxLzgvMjU2MSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

37. 37.Wyss-Coray, T. and  J. Rogers, Inflammation in Alzheimer disease-a brief review of the basic science and clinical literature. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med, 2012. 2(1): p. a006346.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNzaHBlcnNwZWN0bWVkIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjExOiIyLzEvYTAwNjM0NiI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

38. 38.Rolland, Y.,  G. Abellan van Kan, and  B. Vellas, Physical activity and Alzheimer’s disease: from prevention to therapeutic perspectives. J Am Med Dir Assoc, 2008. 9(6): p. 390–405.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jamda.2008.02.007&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18585641&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000257723000006&link_type=ISI) 

39. 39.Logsdon, R.G., et al., Making physical activity accessible to older adults with memory loss: a feasibility study. Gerontologist, 2009. 49 Suppl 1: p. S94–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/geront/gnp082&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19525222&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

40. 40.Pate, R.R., et al., Physical activity and public health. A recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine. JAMA, 1995. 273(5): p. 402–7.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.1995.03520290054029&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=7823386&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1995QD20300025&link_type=ISI) 

41. 41.Caspersen, C.J.,  M.A. Pereira, and  K.M. Curran, Changes in physical activity patterns in the United States, by sex and cross-sectional age. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2000. 32(9): p. 1601–9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00005768-200009000-00013&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10994912&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000089234400013&link_type=ISI) 

42. 42.McAuley, E., et al., Trajectory of declines in physical activity in community-dwelling older women: social cognitive influences. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci, 2009. 64(5): p. 543–50.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19528360&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000269441100001&link_type=ISI) 

43. 43.Morey, M.C.,  C.F. Pieper, and  J. Cornoni-Huntley, Physical fitness and functional limitations in community-dwelling older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 1998. 30(5): p. 715–23.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00005768-199805000-00012&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9588614&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000073320900012&link_type=ISI) 

44. 44.Swinburn, B.A., et al., The green prescription study: a randomized controlled trial of written exercise advice provided by general practitioners. Am J Public Health, 1998. 88(2): p. 288–91.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.2105/AJPH.88.2.288&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9491025&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000074113400024&link_type=ISI) 

45. 45.Elley, C.R., et al., Effectiveness of counselling patients on physical activity in general practice: cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 2003. 326(7393): p. 793.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYm1qIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEyOiIzMjYvNzM5My83OTMiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo1MDoiL21lZHJ4aXYvZWFybHkvMjAyNC8wNy8zMS8yMDI0LjA3LjI5LjI0MzExMTgxLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

46. 46.Patel, A., et al., Perceived barriers, benefits, and motives for physical activity: two primary-care physical activity prescription programs. J Aging Phys Act, 2013. 21(1): p. 85–99.
    
    

47. 47.Beddie, R., The Green Prescription and the launch of the NZ Register of Exercise Professionals. N Z Med J, 2004. 117(1189): p. U785; author reply U785.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15014570&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

48. 48.Thomas, S.,  J. Reading, and  R.J. Shephard, Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Canadian Journal of Sport Science, 1992. 17(4): p. 338–45.
    
    

49. 49.Ackermann, R.T., et al., Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program into the community. The DEPLOY Pilot Study. Am J Prev Med, 2008. 35(4): p. 357–63.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.amepre.2008.06.035&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18779029&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000259308900006&link_type=ISI) 

50. 50.National Institute on Aging, Growing Older in America: the Health and Retirement Study,  F. Karp, Editor. 2007, National Institutes of Health: Bethesda, MD.
    
    

51. 51.Barnes, D.E. and  K. Yaffe, The projected effect of risk factor reduction on Alzheimer’s disease prevalence. The Lancet Neurology, 2011. 10(9): p. 819–828.
    
    

52. 52.The Writing Group for the Activity Counseling Trial Research, G., Effects of physical activity counseling in primary care: The activity counseling trial: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 2001. 286(6): p. 677–687.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.286.6.677&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11495617&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000170271500023&link_type=ISI) 

53. 53.Mayer, C.J., et al., Developing a Telephone Assessment of Physical Activity (TAPA) questionnaire for older adults. Prev Chronic Dis, 2008. 5(1): p. A24.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18082013&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

54. 54.Vidoni, E.D., et al., Dose-Response of Aerobic Exercise on Cognition: A Community-Based, Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. PLoS One, 2015. 10(7): p. e0131647.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0131647&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26158265&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

55. 55.Weinstein, A.A., et al., Effect of aerobic exercise training on fatigue and physical activity in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Respir Med, 2013. 107(5): p. 778–84.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.rmed.2013.02.006&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23478192&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

56. 56.American College of Sports, M., Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription 2000, Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
    
    

57. 57.Blair, S.N.,  Y. Cheng, and  J.S. Holder, Is physical activity or physical fitness more important in defining health benefits? Medicine And Science In Sports And Exercise, 2001. 33(6): p. S379–S399.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00005768-200106001-00007&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11427763&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000169223200007&link_type=ISI) 

58. 58.Aronson, D., et al., The association between cardiorespiratory fitness and C-reactive protein in subjects with the metabolic syndrome. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2004. 44(10): p. 2003–2007.
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI0NC8xMC8yMDAzIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjQvMDcvMzEvMjAyNC4wNy4yOS4yNDMxMTE4MS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

59. 59.Barnes, D.E., et al., A Longitudinal Study of Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Cognitive Function in Healthy Older Adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2003. 51(4): p. 459–465.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51153.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12657064&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000181803000003&link_type=ISI) 

60. 60.Byun, W., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness and risk of prostate cancer: findings from the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study. Cancer Epidemiol, 2011. 35(1): p. 59–65.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.canep.2010.07.013&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20708996&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

61. 61.Church, T.S., et al., Associations Between Cardiorespiratory Fitness and C-Reactive Protein in Men. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, 2002. 22(11): p. 1869–1876.
    
    

62. 62.Ferreira, I., et al., Longitudinal changes in VO2max: Associations with carotid IMT and arterial stiffness. Medicine And Science In Sports And Exercise, 2003. 35(10): p. 1670–1678.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1249/01.MSS.0000089247.37563.4B&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14523303&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000185754800008&link_type=ISI) 

63. 63.LaMonte, M.J., et al., Cardiorespiratory Fitness Is Inversely Associated With the Incidence of Metabolic Syndrome: A Prospective Study of Men and Women. Circulation, 2005. 112(4): p. 505–512.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjExMi80LzUwNSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

64. 64.Lee, C.D.,  S.N. Blair, and  A.S. Jackson, Cardiorespiratory fitness, body composition, and all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality in men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1999. 69(3): p. 373–380.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiYWpjbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI2OS8zLzM3MyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

65. 65.Prakash, R.S., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness: A predictor of cortical plasticity in multiple sclerosis. Neuroimage, 2007. 34(3): p. 1238–44.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.10.003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17134916&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000243758700034&link_type=ISI) 

66. 66.Sui, X.,  M.J. LaMonte, and  S.N. Blair, Cardiorespiratory fitness as a predictor of nonfatal cardiovascular events in asymptomatic women and men. Am J Epidemiol, 2007. 165(12): p. 1413–23.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/aje/kwm031&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17406007&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000247240700011&link_type=ISI) 

67. 67.Sui, X., et al., Cardiorespiratory fitness and adiposity as mortality predictors in older adults. JAMA, 2007. 298(21): p. 2507–16.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.298.21.2507&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18056904&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000251361900016&link_type=ISI) 

68. 68.Sui, X., et al., Influence of cardiorespiratory fitness on lung cancer mortality. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2010. 42(5): p. 872–8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181c47b65&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19996990&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000276752400005&link_type=ISI) 

69. 69.Hollenberg, M., et al., Treadmill Exercise Testing in an Epidepiologic Study of Elderly Subjects. Journal of Gerontology: Biological Sciences, 1998. 53A(4): p. 259–267.
    
    

70. 70.Hacker, M., et al., Relationship between right ventricular ejection fraction and maximum exercise oxygen consumption: a methodological study in chronic heart failure patients*1. Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, 2003. 10(6): p. 644–649.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14668776&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

71. 71.Fleg, J.L., Morrell, C. H., Bos, A. G., et al., Accelerated Longitudinal Decline of Aerobic Capacity in Healthy Older Adults. Circulation, 2005. 112(5): p. 674–82.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjExMi81LzY3NCI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

72. 72.Duncan, G.E.,  E.T. Howley, and  B.N. Johnson, Applicability of VO2max criteria: discontinuous versus continuous protocols. Medicine And Science In Sports And Exercise, 1997. 29(2): p. 273–278.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00005768-199702000-00017&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9044234&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1997WH75500017&link_type=ISI) 

73. 73.Varma, V.R. and  A. Watts, Daily Physical Activity Patterns During the Early Stage of Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis, 2017. 55(2): p. 659–667.
    
    

74. 74.Schrack, J.A., et al., Assessing Daily Physical Activity in Older Adults: Unraveling the Complexity of Monitors, Measures, and Methods. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2016. 71(8): p. 1039–48.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/gerona/glw026&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26957472&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

75. 75.Lynch, B.M., et al., Objectively measured physical activity and sedentary time of breast cancer survivors, and associations with adiposity: findings from NHANES (2003-2006). Cancer Causes Control, 2010. 21(2): p. 283–8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10552-009-9460-6&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19882359&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000273949200013&link_type=ISI) 

76. 76.Stewart, A.L., et al., Evaluation of CHAMPS, a physical activity promotion program for older adults. Ann Behav Med, 1997. 19(4): p. 353–61.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/BF02895154&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9706362&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000075216900007&link_type=ISI) 

77. 77.Stewart, A.L., et al., Physical Activity Outcomes of CHAMPS II: A Physical Activity Promotion Program for Older Adults. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 2001. 56(8): p. M465–470.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/gerona/56.8.M465&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11487597&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000170248600009&link_type=ISI) 

78. 78.King, A.C., et al., Comparative effects of two physical activity programs on measured and perceived physical functioning and other health-related quality of life outcomes in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2000. 55(2): p. M74–83.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/gerona/55.2.M74&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10737689&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000088044200014&link_type=ISI) 

79. 79.Rikli, R. and  J. Jones, Development and validation of a functional fitness test for community- residing older adults. J Aging Phys Act, 1999. 7: p. 129–161.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1123/japa.7.2.129&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000079452400001&link_type=ISI) 

80. 80.Narotzki, B., et al., Six minute walk test as a valuable assessment tool for exercise capacity in healthy kibbutz elderly. J Aging Res Clin Practice, 2012. 1(1): p. 61–63.
    
    

81. 81.Kohrt, W.M., Preliminary evidence that DEXA provides an accurate assessment of body composition. Journal of Applied Physiology, 1998. 84(1): p. 372–377.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9451659&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000071461000049&link_type=ISI) 

82. 82.Pintauro, S.J., et al., Cross-calibration of fat and lean measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to pig carcass analysis in the pediatric body weight range. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1996. 63(3): p. 293–298.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiYWpjbiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo4OiI2My8zLzI5MyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDI0LzA3LzMxLzIwMjQuMDcuMjkuMjQzMTExODEuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

83. 83.Morris, M.C., et al., Consumption of Fish and n-3 Fatty Acids and Risk of Incident Alzheimer Disease. Archives of Neurology, 2003. 60(7): p. 940–946.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/archneur.60.7.940&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12873849&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000184064800004&link_type=ISI) 

84. 84.Nikolaos Scarmeas, Y.S.M.-X.T.R.M.J.A.L., Mediterranean diet and risk for Alzheimer’s disease. Annals of Neurology, 2006. 9999(9999): p. NA.
    
    

85. 85.Scarmeas, N., et al., Physical Activity and Alzheimer Disease Course. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2010.
    
    

86. 86.Scarmeas, N., et al., Physical activity, diet, and risk of Alzheimer disease. JAMA, 2009. 302(6): p. 627–37.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.2009.1144&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19671904&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000268852300021&link_type=ISI) 

87. 87.Buchan, D.S., et al., Physical Activity Behaviour: An Overview of Current and Emergent Theoretical Practices. Journal of Obesity, 2012. 2012(1): p. 546459.
    
    

88. 88.Elsawy, B. and  K.E. Higgins, Physical activity guidelines for older adults. American family physician, 2010. 81(1): p. 55–59.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20052963&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000273580500008&link_type=ISI) 

89. 89.Nelson, M.E., et al., Physical activity and public health in older adults: recommendation from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation, 2007. 116(9): p. 1094.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.185650&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17671236&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000249031100014&link_type=ISI) 

90. 90.Morris, J.K., et al., Aerobic exercise for Alzheimer’s disease: A randomized controlled pilot trial. PLOS ONE, 2017. 12(2): p. e0170547.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0170547&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=28187125&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 

91. 91.Borg, G.,  P. Hassmén, and  M. Lagerström, Perceived exertion related to heart rate and blood lactate during arm and leg exercise. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 1987. 56: p. 679–685.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/BF00424810&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3678222&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1987K106400012&link_type=ISI) 

92. 92.Day, M.L., et al., Monitoring exercise intensity during resistance training using the session RPE scale. J Strength Cond Res, 2004. 18(2): p. 353-8.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15142026&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2024%2F07%2F31%2F2024.07.29.24311181.atom)