Young Adults’ Mental Health and Commitment to Exercise during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental health issues, particularly anxiety and depression, continue to show an upward trend among young adults in Canada. This persistent increase has prompted researchers to investigate various treatment modalities, with physical activity emerging as a promising intervention. Evidence shows that engagement in physical activity can alleviate symptoms of anxiety and depression, with neurochemical effects comparable to pharmacological interventions, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The COVID-19 pandemic, however, introduced unprecedented challenges through the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that significantly restricted physical activity and increased mental health issues, specifically anxiety and depression. This longitudinal study used a community sample of Canadian young adults (n=443) to examine the association of the COVID-19 pandemic on commitment to exercise and associated effects on individual’s mental health outcomes across three time points over four years (from age 22 to 26). Contrary to prevailing literature, our findings did not reveal any consistent or strong associations between commitment to exercise and mental health symptoms within and across time. Although these results do not align with the established literature, they offer valuable insights and direction for future investigations in this domain. Given the insufficient availability of mental health professionals, it remains crucial for individuals and researchers to continue exploring the potential of physical activity and alternative interventions for mitigating mental health symptoms among young adults. Such efforts may contribute to the development of more accessible and cost-effective strategies for promoting psychological well-being among young adults and the general population.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".