Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 6,980 items for :

  • Sport and Exercise Science/Kinesiology x
  • Psychology and Behavior in Sport/Exercise x
Clear All
Restricted access

Michelle Ogrodnik, Jillian Halladay, Barbara Fenesi, Jennifer Heisz and Katholiki Georgiades

Background: Participation in physical activity (PA) is a modifiable factor that contributes to academic success, yet the optimal dose (ie, frequency) and mechanisms underlying the effect require further exploration. Methods: Using data from 19,886 elementary and 11,238 secondary school students across Ontario, Canada, this study examined associations between PA participation frequency, academic achievement, and inattention and hyperactivity. Results: Among elementary students, there was a positive association between PA frequency and academic achievement. Participating in 1 to 2 days per week of PA related to higher academic achievement compared with no days, whereas 7 days per week had the largest associations. For secondary students, a minimum of 3 to 4 days per week was associated with higher academic achievement with no significant benefit of additional days. Indirect effects of inattention and hyperactivity were found for both groups, suggesting that the benefits of PA on academic achievement may be partly explained by reductions in inattention and hyperactivity, especially for secondary school students. Conclusion: Students may experience academic benefits from PA even if they are not meeting the guidelines of exercising daily. These benefits may occur, in part, through reductions in inattention and hyperactivity. Further work is needed to determine the temporality and mechanism of these associations.

Full access

Tanya Tripathi, Stacey C. Dusing, Peter E. Pidcoe, Yaoying Xu, Mary S. Shall and Daniel L. Riddle

Aims: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends “parents to incorporate supervised, awake ‘prone play’ in their infant’s routine to support motor development and minimize the risk of plagiocephaly”. The purpose of this feasibility study was to compare usual care to a reward contingency–based intervention, developed to increase prone tolerance and improve motor skills. Methods: Ten full-term infants, 3–6- months old, with poor prone tolerance were randomized to either the Education group or Reward contingency group. Each group participated in three parent education sessions and 15 intervention sessions, over the period of three weeks. Infants in the Reward contingency group used the Prone Play Activity Center, a technology developed to reinforce motor behavior of infants in prone position. Intervention frequency and parent feedback data determined the feasibility of the interventions. Results: Infants in the Reward contingency group practiced a median of 12 of the 15 anticipated intervention sessions in the Prone Play Activity Center. These infants used the device for a mean of 18 minutes per day. Parents of infants in the Education group practiced a median of 10 sessions of the 15 anticipated intervention sessions. Conclusion: The reward contingency–based intervention is feasible for use in a future clinical trial with some modifications.

Restricted access

Audrey G. Evers, Jessica A Somogie, Ian L. Wong, Jennifer D. Allen and Adolfo G. Cuevas

The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a pilot mindfulness program for student athletes by assessing mental health, mindfulness ability, and perceived stress before and after the intervention. The mindfulness program was adapted from a program developed at the University of Southern California. The four-session intervention taught the basics of mindfulness, self-care skills, and guided meditations. Participants completed surveys before and after the intervention. Mindfulness ability was assessed with the Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale, mental health was assessed with a modified Short Form Health Survey, and stress was assessed with the Perceived Stress Scale. After the intervention, participants reported improvement in mindfulness ability, t(28) = −2.61, p =  .014, mental health, t(28)  =  −2.87, p =  .008, and a trending improvement in perceived stress, t(28)  =  1.86, p =  .073. A short mindfulness program may be effective for improving mental health and mindfulness ability in collegiate student athletes.

Full access

Jessica Gorzelitz, Chloe Farber, Ronald Gangnon and Lisa Cadmus-Bertram

Background: The evidence base regarding validity of wearable fitness trackers for assessment and/or modification of physical activity behavior is evolving. Accurate assessment of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA) is important for measuring adherence to physical activity guidelines in the United States and abroad. Therefore, this systematic review synthesizes the state of the validation literature regarding wearable trackers and MVPA. Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted through October 2019 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018103808). Studies were eligible if they reported on the validity of MVPA and used devices from Fitbit, Apple, or Garmin released in 2012 or later or available on the market at the time of review. A meta-analysis was conducted on the correlation measures comparing wearables with the ActiGraph. Results: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria; all used a Fitbit device; one included a Garmin model and no Apple-device studies were found. Moderate to high correlations (.7–.9) were found between MVPA from the wearable tracker versus criterion measure (ActiGraph n = 14). Considerable heterogeneity was seen with respect to the specific definition of MVPA for the criterion device, the statistical techniques used to assess validity, and the correlations between wearable trackers and ActiGraph across studies. Conclusions: There is a need for standardization of validation methods and reporting outcomes in individual studies to allow for comparability across the evidence base. Despite the different methods utilized within studies, nearly all concluded that wearable trackers are valid for measuring MVPA.

Restricted access

Kayla J. Nuss, Nicholas A. Hulett, Alden Erickson, Eric Burton, Kyle Carr, Lauren Mooney, Jacob Anderson, Ashley Comstock, Ethan J. Schlemer, Lucas J. Archambault and Kaigang Li

Objective: To validate and compare the accuracy of energy expenditure (EE) and step counts measured by ActiGraph accelerometers (ACT) at dominant and nondominant wrist and hip sites. Methods: Thirty young adults (15 females, age 22.93 ± 3.30 years) wore four ActiGraph wGT3X accelerometers while walking and running on a treadmill for 7 min at seven different speeds (1.7, 2.5, 3.4, 4.2, 5.0, 5.5, and 6.0 mph). The EE from each ACT was calculated using the Freedson Adult equation, and the “worn on the wrist” option was selected for the wrist data. Indirect calorimetry and manually counted steps were used as criterion measures. Mean absolute percentage error and two one-sided test procedures for equivalence were used for the analyses. Results: All ACTs underestimated the EE with mean absolute percentage errors over 30% for wrist placement and over 20% for hip placement. The wrist-worn ACTs underestimated the step count with mean absolute percentage errors above 30% for both dominant and nondominant placements. The hip-worn ACTs accurately assessed steps for the whole sample and for women and men (p < .001 to .05 for two one-sided tests procedures), but not at speeds slower than 2.0 mph. Conclusion: Neither hip nor wrist placements assess EE accurately. More algorithms and methods to derive EE estimates from wrist-worn ACTs must be developed and validated. For step counts, both dominant and nondominant hip placements, but not wrist placements, lead to accurate results for both men and women.

Restricted access

Ryan Eckert, Jennifer Huberty, Heidi Kosiorek, Shannon Clark-Sienkiewicz, Linda Larkey and Ruben Mesa

Introduction: The delivery of online interventions in cancer patients/survivors has increased. The measurement of participation in online interventions is important to consider, namely, the challenges of the remote assessment of activity. The purpose of this study was to report the measures used to assess intervention compliance and other physical activity participation in two online yoga studies, the relationship between the multimethod measures used, and the ability of cancer patients to complete these measures. Methods: The methods described are of two online yoga studies (feasibility and pilot). Cancer patients were asked to participate in 60 min/week of online yoga for 12 weeks, complete a weekly yoga log, wear a Fitbit daily for 12 weeks, and complete a weekly physical activity log. Finally, Clicky®, a web analytics software, was used to track online yoga participation. Results: Eighty-four people participated across both studies, with 63/84 participating in online yoga, averaging 57.5 ± 33.2 min/week of self-reported yoga participation compared to 41.4 ± 26.1 min/week of Clicky® yoga participation (Lin concordance = 0.28). All 84 participants averaged 95.5 ± 111.8 min/week of self-reported moderate/vigorous physical activity compared with 98.1 ± 115.9 min/week of Fitbit-determined moderate/vigorous physical activity (Lin concordance = 0.33). Across both studies, 82.9% of the yoga logs were completed, the Fitbit was worn on 75.2% of the days, and 78.7% of the physical activity logs were completed. Conclusions: Weak relationships between self-report and objective measures were demonstrated, but the compliance rates were above 75% for the study measures. Future research is needed, investigating the intricacies of self-report physical activity participation in remote interventions and the validation of a gold standard measurement for online interventions.