Back

The causal relationships between leisure-time physical activity and body mass index in adulthood: A triangulation study

Kankaanää, A.; Joensuu, L.; Ekelund, U.; Pitkänen, A.; Waller, K.; Palviainen, T.; Kaprio, J.; Ollikainen, M.; Aaltonen, S.; Sillanpää, E.

2026-03-11 public and global health
10.64898/2026.03.10.26348015 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPrevious studies have presented conflicting findings regarding the potential causal relationships between leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) and body mass index (BMI). Here, we use individual-level data and apply a triangulation framework that incorporates three complementary methods to investigate the bidirectional causal associations between LTPA and BMI. MethodsWe used data from a longitudinal Finnish twin cohort with four measurement points spanning 36 years. The data included 22,696 twin individuals aged 18-50 years at baseline (52.4% women); 8,527 had genetic data available. We applied three analytical approaches suggested to strengthen causal inference in observational studies: Random intercept cross-lagged path model (RI-CLPM) for longitudinal data, one-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR) and Direction of Causation (DoC and MR-DoC) twin models for cross-sectional data at each measurement point. ResultsAll three approaches provided evidence for a causal effect of higher BMI on lower LTPA, particularly at the later follow-up stages. Only twin models suggested a negative causal effect of LTPA on BMI. Men and women showed mainly similar effects. ConclusionsEvidence triangulation across the three methodologies provided support for a causal effect of higher BMI on lower LTPA, whereas the evidence for a reverse effect was less convincing. Our results indicate that the role of high BMI in limiting LTPA becomes more important with advancing age, while also highlighting the importance of accounting for timing when studying the causal effects of LTPA on BMI and vice versa.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.