Risk of undermining the cognitive benefits of physical activity by overcorrecting for risk of bias: Reply to Román-Caballero (2025).
Publisher DOI
PubMed ID
41428514
Abstract
An increasing number of meta-analyses examining chronic and acute effects of physical activity on cognition-varying in aims, eligibility criteria, and statistical methods to reduce risk of bias-have contributed to inconsistent conclusions. To make evidence-based statements about the effects of physical activity on cognition that can reliably inform policy development in physical activity advocacy documents, we need a transparent open science approach and a balanced trade-off between risk of over- and underestimation of effects. Our reply to Román-Caballero's commentary on our meta-analysis (Mavilidi et al., 2025) addresses the need to balance conflicting interpretations of meta-analytical strategies, results, and conclusions. Rather than debating which methodological strategies for evidence synthesis are generally most appropriate, we focus on identifying those best suited to examine the still overlooked role of context in advancing our understanding of the effects of physical activity on cognition. Thus, we justify our methodological choices in a way that, considering the complex and multifaceted nature of the relation between physical activity and cognition, should avoid the risk of discarding meaningful cognitive benefits while attempting to correct for risk of bias (i.e., prevent "throwing out the baby with the bathwater"). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
Date Issued
2025-11
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
Subjects
physical activity
•
cognition
•
context
•
underestimation
•
publication bias
Language(s)
en
Author(s)
Mavilidi, Myrto F. | |
Vazou, Spyridoula | |
Owen, Katherine B. | |
Álvarez-Bueno, Celia | |
Robinson, Katie | |
Lubans, David R. |
Journal
Psychological Bulletin
Publisher
American Psychological Association
ISSN
1939-1455
0033-2909
Access(Rights)
restricted