Browse

Background: The movement behaviors of LGBTQA+ young people, who encounter specific health, and other, challenges are not well understood. This systematic review examines the 24-hour movement behaviors of LGBTQA+ young people compared with population estimates of meeting the 24-hour movement guidelines. Methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to January 2024. Observational studies published in English and reporting quantitative data for physical activity, sedentary behavior, or sleep duration for LGBTQA+ individuals <24 years old were included. Data were narratively synthesized for children/adolescents (<18 years) and young adults (18–24 years), guided by the Cochrane Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines. Results: Fifty-six studies were included; 46 were of “fair” quality and 37 were conducted in the United States. Physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep outcomes were reported in 46, 11, and 14 studies, respectively. Ninety unique LGBTQA+ terms were identified. Based on outcomes reported in ≥1 study, and compared to population estimates, LGBTQA+ young people were less likely to meet aerobic physical activity and strength/resistance training guidelines. LGBTQA+ children/adolescents were less likely to meet the sleep guidelines. Young adults demonstrated similar adherence to sleep guidelines as population estimates. Conclusions: Overall, our results suggest that LGBTQA+ young people have suboptimal 24-hour movement behaviors; in some cases, worse than population estimates. Utilization of more robust measures of exposure and outcome variables is recommended, with a focus on sleep and sedentary behavior.

Background: Physical activity is crucial for maintaining health and preventing chronic diseases. However, climate conditions can impact physical activity patterns, and conversely, physical activity can impact climate change. This umbrella review aims to summarize the existing evidence regarding the relationships between physical activity and climate change, as revealed in previous reviews. Methods: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were analyzed. Searches were conducted across GreenFILE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases for peer-reviewed articles published in English. A 2-stage independent screening process was conducted, and methodological quality was assessed using the JBI framework. Standardized data extraction methods were then applied. Results: Out of 1292 articles retrieved, 7 met all eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Three articles examined physical activity as a primary exposure, 3 focused on the impacts of climate change, and one considered both physical activity and climate change as primary exposures. Conclusions: Findings reveal an interplay between climate change and physical activity. While rising temperatures may prompt outdoor activities up to a certain temperature threshold, air pollution and extreme heat can have harmful effects. Active transportation and improved logistics around large-scale sporting events can mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but transportation systems linked to sports venues may increase emissions. Research on the reciprocal relationship between climate change and physical activity domains, and integrating the community into climate discussions, is crucial for equity, especially for marginalized communities. Incorporating climate adaptation and mitigation strategies in physical activity infrastructure to minimize environmental impacts is critical.

Background: There is limited evidence on the priorities and opportunities associated with promoting population physical activity (PA) participation for the post-COVID-19-pandemic future. Purpose: This study assessed government-led PA promotion efforts before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with post-COVID-19-pandemic priorities and recommendations. Methods: Two separate cross-sectional surveys conducted in 2023. Survey 1 was targeted at the Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) Country Contacts. Survey 2 also included key international informants representing influential stakeholders in PA policy implementation. Results: There were 68 respondents to Survey 1, collectively representing 61 countries. An additional 37 people, including representatives from 14 key international stakeholders responded to Survey 2. Eighty-two percent of countries had national PA policies. COVID-19 widely disrupted PA policy implementation. Less than 40% of countries integrated PA into their COVID-19 response plan and more than 75% reported policies that restricted PA participation. Although most respondents indicated that government PA priorities did not change due to the COVID-19 pandemic, one in five countries reported that cross-sectoral partnership had become more important during this period. Less than a third of postpandemic governments reported as highly engaged despite the widespread proliferation of PA policies and plans prior to the pandemic. There were variations according to country, region, and income. Conclusions: Elevating PA promotion on the public health agenda is crucial for the post-COVID-19-pandemic era. At a policy level, it is critical to focus on adequate resourcing, cross-sectoral partnerships, integrated interventions, and inequities in participation. These factors have become increasingly important in the postpandemic PA policy landscape.

Background: Physical activity and sport (PAS) have been related to health and social benefits, but their monetary value remains unclear. This systematic review on the social return on investment of PAS aimed to find what are the social outcomes measured in previous PAS literature and how are these measured and valued. Methods: A systematic search was conducted on WoS, PubMed, and EconLit. Articles in English, measuring the social value of any type of PAS in monetary terms and utilizing a social return on investment framework, were included. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Drummond checklist. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Results: Fifty-five documents (2010–2022), from all continents except America, were included; only 8 were published in peer-reviewed journals, whereas 47 were reports. Most studies evaluated the benefits of specific programs, and 6 measured the engagement in PAS at the population level based on national or community surveys. The social outcomes identified were health (94.5%), crime (50.9%), education (83.6%), subjective well-being (89.1%), social capital (60%), and other (3.6%–23.6%). The valuation methods included willingness to pay, well-being valuation, the cost of an activity that could result in the same outcome, and cost databases associating outcomes with a monetary value. Conclusions: This study updates a previous review and widens the scope by answering the question of how social outcomes are measured and valued in previous PAS literature. Given the heterogeneity found in the application of the method, this review will inform a Delphi study to reach a Global Consensus Statement on the measurement of social value and PAS.

Background: The World Health Organization recognizes that physical activity (PA) during childhood is crucial for healthy development, aligning well with the achievement of several United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This study aimed to explore the associations between 10 key indicators of PA for children and adolescents assessed in the Global Matrix 4.0 project, and the UN SDGs. Methods: Data from 57 countries/jurisdictions of the Global Matrix 4.0 project were used. The UN SDG indicators were sourced from the SDG Transformation Center, which publishes each country’s performance on each of the 17 SDGs. Given the robust evidence supporting plausible links between PA and SDGs 3 (good health and well-being), 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure), 11 (sustainable cities and communities), 13 (climate action), and 16 (peace, justice, and strong institutions), these SDGs were investigated. Results: Countries/jurisdictions with good and moderate performance in achieving SDG 3, SDG 9, SDG 11, and SDG 16 had higher grades than countries/jurisdictions with fair performance in achieving these SDGs for the following indicators: Organized Sports and PA, Community and Environment, and Government Investments and Strategies. However, countries/jurisdictions with good performance in achieving SDG 13 had lower grades than countries/jurisdictions with fair performance in achieving SDG 13 for the following indicators: Organized Sports and PA, Community and Environment, and Government Investments and Strategies. Conclusions: Organized Sports and PA, Community and Environment, and Government Investments and Strategies were the indicators that demonstrated differences between countries/jurisdictions with good and poor performance in achieving the SDGs.