MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767998313 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187668

The influence of physical activity, sedentary behavior on health-related quality of life among the general population of children and adolescents: A systematic review

2017· review· en· W2767998313 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiuyun Wu, Li Han, Jianhua Zhang, Sheng Luo, Jin Wei Hu, Kui Sun

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong Province
KeywordsPsycINFOSystematic reviewMedicinePopulationMEDLINEQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The association between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life in children and adolescents has been mostly investigated in those young people with chronic disease conditions. No systematic review to date has synthesized the relationship between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life in the general healthy population of children and adolescents. The purpose of this study was to review systematically the existing literature that evaluated the relations between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life in the general population of children and adolescents. METHODS: We conducted a computer search for English language literature from databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO and PubMed-related articles as well as the reference lists of existing literature between 1946 and the second week of January 2017 to retrieve eligible studies. We included the studies that assessed associations between physical activity and/or sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life among the general population of children and adolescents aged between 3-18 years. The study design included cross-sectional, longitudinal and health intervention studies. We excluded the studies that examined associations between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life among children and adolescents with specific chronic diseases, and other studies and reports including reviews, meta-analyses, study protocols, comments, letters, case reports and guidelines. We followed up the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement in the reporting of this review. The risk of bias of the primary studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We synthesized the difference in health-related quality of life scores between different levels of physical activity and sedentary time. RESULTS: In total, 31 studies met the inclusion criteria and were synthesized in the review. Most of the included studies used a cross-sectional design (n = 21). There were six longitudinal studies and three school-based physical activity intervention studies. One study used both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs. We found that higher levels of physical activity were associated with better health-related quality of life and increased time of sedentary behavior was linked to lower health-related quality of life among children and adolescents. A dose-response relation between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life was observed in several studies suggesting that the higher frequency of physical activity or the less time being sedentary, the better the health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this study suggest that school health programs promoting active lifestyles among children and adolescents may contribute to the improvement of health-related quality of life. Future research is needed to extend studies on longitudinal relationships between physical activity, sedentary behavior and health-related quality of life, and on effects of physical activity interventions on health-related quality of life among children and youth.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations677
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207