4 research outputs found

    Associations between executive attention and objectively measured physical activity in adolescence : findings from ALSPAC, a UK cohort

    Get PDF
    Studies of relationships between physical activity and children's attention skills are often constrained by small samples, lack of objective measurements and lack of control for confounders. The present study explores the relationship using objective measures of physical activity from a large birth cohort which permits both longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses. Data from 4755 participants (45% male) with valid measurement of physical activity (total volume and intensity) by accelerometry at age 11 from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (UK) were analysed. Attention was evaluated by the Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch) at 11 years and by the Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) computerised cognitive assessment system at 13 years. Males engaged in an average of 29 min (SD 17) of daily moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) at age 11 years compared with 18 min (SD 12) among females. In unadjusted models, higher total volume of physical activity was associated with lower performance across attention tasks. When total volume of physical activity and potential confounding variables were controlled for, higher MVPA was associated with better performance at both 11 and 13 years. Correction for regression dilution approximately doubled the standardised β coefficients. We observed complex associations but results suggest that MVPA may be beneficial for attention processes in adolescence, especially in males. This has implications for interventions aimed at improving executive attention but may also be supportive of the benefits of physical activity for educational and mental health outcomes

    Recommended approaches to the scientific evaluation of ecotoxicological hazards and risks of endocrine-active substances

    No full text
    A SETAC Pellston Workshop® “Environmental Hazard and Risk Assessment Approaches for Endocrine-Active Substances (EHRA)” was held in February 2016 in Pensacola, Florida, USA. The primary objective of the workshop was to provide advice, based on current scientific understanding, to regulators and policy makers; the aim being to make considered, informed decisions on whether to select an ecotoxicological hazard- or a risk-based approach for regulating a given endocrine-disrupting substance (EDS) under review. The workshop additionally considered recent developments in the identification of EDS. Case studies were undertaken on 6 endocrine-active substances (EAS—not necessarily proven EDS, but substances known to interact directly with the endocrine system) that are representative of a range of perturbations of the endocrine system and considered to be data rich in relevant information at multiple biological levels of organization for 1 or more ecologically relevant taxa. The substances selected were 17α-ethinylestradiol, perchlorate, propiconazole, 17β-trenbolone, tributyltin, and vinclozolin. The 6 case studies were not comprehensive safety evaluations but provided foundations for clarifying key issues and procedures that should be considered when assessing the ecotoxicological hazards and risks of EAS and EDS. The workshop also highlighted areas of scientific uncertainty, and made specific recommendations for research and methods-development to resolve some of the identified issues. The present paper provides broad guidance for scientists in regulatory authorities, industry, and academia on issues likely to arise during the ecotoxicological hazard and risk assessment of EAS and EDS. The primary conclusion of this paper, and of the SETAC Pellston Workshop on which it is based, is that if data on environmental exposure, effects on sensitive species and life-stages, delayed effects, and effects at low concentrations are robust, initiating environmental risk assessment of EDS is scientifically sound and sufficiently reliable and protective of the environment. In the absence of such data, assessment on the basis of hazard is scientifically justified until such time as relevant new information is available
    corecore