Search Results
You are looking at 11 - 14 of 14 items for
- Author: Lewis J. James x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
James A. Betts, Javier T. Gonzalez, Louise M. Burke, Graeme L. Close, Ina Garthe, Lewis J. James, Asker E. Jeukendrup, James P. Morton, David C. Nieman, Peter Peeling, Stuart M. Phillips, Trent Stellingwerff, Luc J.C. van Loon, Clyde Williams, Kathleen Woolf, Ron Maughan, and Greg Atkinson
Courtney C. Walton, Kelsey J. Lewis, James Kirby, Rosemary Purcell, Simon M. Rice, and Margaret S. Osborne
This cross-sectional study explored athlete responses to the Compassion Motivation and Action Scales Self-Compassion Scale, examining its relationship with well-being. Athlete (N = 207; mean age 27.9 years) scores were consistent with previous population means. Scores on the Compassion Motivation and Action Scales Self-Compassion Scale did not differ between elite and nonelite athletes, nor did they correlate significantly with trait competitiveness. Significant differences emerged based on athlete well-being state, with athletes categorized as “flourishing” scoring higher on the total score and all subscales of the Compassion Motivation and Action Scales Self-Compassion Scale, as compared with those with “moderate mental health” (Cohen’s ds from 0.58 to 0.92). Furthermore, the distress tolerance subscale significantly mediated the relationship between self-compassion intentions and well-being (indirect path: B = 0.034, p < .001). The results suggest that self-compassionate intentions are not enough, and athletes may need support to tolerate the distress that comes with moving toward one’s own suffering.
Salma Alabdulwahed, Natalia Galán-López, Tom Hill, Lewis J. James, Bryna Catherine Rose Chrismas, Sebastien Racinais, Trent Stellingwerff, Diogo V. Leal, Matheus Hausen, Karim Chamari, Hugh H.K. Fullagar, Christopher Esh, and Lee Taylor
Purpose: To survey elite athletes and practitioners to identify (1) knowledge and application of heat acclimation/acclimatization (HA) interventions, (2) barriers to HA application, and (3) nutritional practices supporting HA. Methods: Elite athletes (n = 55) and practitioners (n = 99) completed an online survey. Mann–Whitney U tests (effect size [ES; r]) assessed differences between ROLE (athletes vs practitioners) and CLIMATE (hot vs temperate). Logistic regression and Pearson chi-square (ES Phi [ϕ]) assessed relationships. Results: Practitioners were more likely to report measuring athletes’ core temperature (training: practitioners 40% [athletes 15%]; P = .001, odds ratio = 4.0, 95% CI, 2%–9%; competition: practitioners 25% [athletes 9%]; P = .020, odds ratio = 3.4, 95% CI, 1%–10%). Practitioners (55% [15% athletes]) were more likely to perceive rectal as the gold standard core temperature measurement site (P = .013, ϕ = .49, medium ES). Temperate (57% [22% hot]) CLIMATE dwellers ranked active HA effectiveness higher (P < .001, r = .30, medium ES). Practitioners commonly identified athletes’ preference (48%), accessibility, and cost (both 47%) as barriers to HA. Increasing carbohydrate intake when training in the heat was more likely recommended by practitioners (49%) than adopted by athletes (26%; P = .006, 95% CI, 0.1%–1%). Practitioners (56% [28% athletes]) were more likely to plan athletes’ daily fluid strategies, adopting a preplanned approach (P = .001; 95% CI, 0.1%–1%). Conclusions: Practitioners, and to a greater extent athletes, lacked self-reported key HA knowledge (eg, core temperature assessment/monitoring methods) yet demonstrated comparatively more appropriate nutritional practices (eg, hydration).
James Scales, Jasmine Chavda, Erika Ikeda, Ivelina Tsocheva, Rosamund E. Dove, Helen E. Wood, Harpal Kalsi, Grainne Colligan, Lewis Griffiths, Bill Day, Cheryll Crichlow, Amanda Keighley, Monica Fletcher, Chris Newby, Florian Tomini, Fran Balkwill, Borislava Mihaylova, Jonathan Grigg, Sean Beevers, Sandra Eldridge, Aziz Sheikh, James Gauderman, Frank Kelly, Gurch Randhawa, Ian S. Mudway, Esther van Sluijs, and Christopher J. Griffiths
Background : Lockdown measures, including school closures, due to the COVID-19 pandemic have caused widespread disruption to children’s lives. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of a national lockdown on children’s physical activity using seasonally matched accelerometry data. Methods: Using a pre/post observational design, 179 children aged 8 to 11 years provided physical activity data measured using hip-worn triaxial accelerometers worn for 5 consecutive days prepandemic and during the January to March 2021 lockdown. Multilevel regression analyses adjusted for covariates were used to assess the impact of lockdown on time spent in sedentary and moderate to vigorous physical activity. Results: A 10.8-minute reduction in daily time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity (standard error: 2.3 min/d, P < .001) and a 33.2-minute increase in daily sedentary activity (standard error: 5.5 min/d, P < .001) were observed during lockdown. This reflected a reduction in daily moderate to vigorous physical activity for those unable to attend school (−13.1 [2.3] min/d, P < .001) during lockdown, with no significant change for those who continued to attend school (0.4 [4.0] min/d, P < .925). Conclusion: These findings suggest that the loss of in-person schooling was the single largest impact on physical activity in this cohort of primary school children in London, Luton, and Dunstable, United Kingdom.
