Association Between 24‐h Movement Behaviors and Mental Health in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Compositional Data Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized evidence of the association between 24-h movement behaviors and social-emotional health and cognitive development in children and adolescents aged 3-18 years from studies using compositional data analysis. Systematic literature searches were conducted on five electronic databases from January 2015 to December 2024. Studies were eligible if they assessed sleep, moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity, light intensity physical activity, and sedentary time. Eligible studies also examined associations between movement behaviors and social-emotional health or cognitive development using compositional data analysis in children and adolescents aged 3-18 years. Pooled effect sizes were estimated using cluster robust variance meta-analysis. A total of 19 studies (5 longitudinal, 14 cross-sectional) encompassing 11 826 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed that engaging in more moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity, getting more sleep, and spending less time sedentary relative to other movement behaviors was favorably associated with social-emotional health; albeit, the observed relationships were small in magnitude. The association for sleep was stronger among adolescents compared to children. No components of 24-h movement behavior compositions were associated with cognitive development. These findings suggest that engaging in healthy movement behavior compositions may be beneficial for social-emotional health in young people, although the link between 24-h movement behavior compositions and cognitive development is less clear.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".