The Effects of Physical Activity on Sleep among Adolescents and Adults: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Examining the correlation between physical activity measures and sleep in normal adolescents and adult population. Methods:A systematic review was conducted on the effects of exercise, its intensity, its frequency and its timing and sleep outcome.Using the databases including MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SPORTDiscus, keywords used were "sleep", "circadian rhythm", "exercise", and "physical activity".Results: To improve the general quality of sleep amongst adolescents and adults, individuals should engage in physical activity at any time of day.It also appears very advantageous to engage in long-term physical activity to maintain the positive effects on sleep.Nonetheless, it seems that sedentary individuals can also benefit from occasional physical activity to improve the quality of their subsequent sleep period.Conclusion: A virtuous relationship between physical activity and sleep may exist in normal adolescents and adults.People should seek to benefit from this link to improve both the quality of their sleep and of their daily functioning.However, larger scale studies, controlling for variables might help to better delineated this relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".