Association between child and youth physical activity and family functioning: a systematic review of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are numerous psychosocial and health benefits linked to physical activity; however, 80% of children and youth are not meeting the recommended guidelines. Genetics, socio-economic status and familial factors impact childhood movement behaviors. In particular, active families support well developed and resilient offspring. As the family unit is optimally placed during a critical time in development, it is pertinent to explore the relationship between family functioning and child and youth physical activity. PURPOSE: To synthesize and analyze the literature to determine the associations between general domains of family functioning (general family functioning, cohesion, communication, conflict, organization, family problem-solving ability, household chaos, and affective environment) and child and youth (children: aged five to 12, youth: aged 13 to 17) physical activity. METHODS: Literature searches across six databases were performed. INCLUSION: Studies that performed and presented a statistical analysis between direct measurements of child and youth physical activity and general domains of family functioning. EXCLUSION: Indirect measurements of family functioning (e.g., support and encouragement). The summary median effect sizes (Pearson r) and interquartile range [IQR] were calculated between child or youth physical activity and each family functioning domain. RESULTS: Search results k = 12,999. Included articles k = 43. Child physical activity had a small median effect size and indeterminate association with general family functioning (r = 0.09; [IQR]: -0.06 to 0.09) and cohesion (r = 0.06; [IQR]: 0.05 to 0.22). Youth physical activity presented with small median effect sizes and significant positive associations with the domains of general family functioning (r = 0.04; [IQR]: 0.02 to 0.06), cohesion (r = 0.09; [IQR]: 0.07 to 0.14), communication (r = 0.17; [IQR]: 0.09 to 0.40), and a negative association with the domain of conflict (r = -0.09; [IQR]: -0.21 to 0.02). Family problem-solving ability, organization, household chaos, and affective environment were understudied across both age groups. CONCLUSIONS: A small effect size in the domains of cohesion, communication, and conflict highlights the association between child and youth physical activity and family functioning. These findings provide a new avenue for researchers, programmers, and policy writers to target to support child and youth physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review is registered with The National Institute for Health and Care Research at The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). PROSPERO ID number is CRD42023454220.
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 | 0.013 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".