IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i16p5837-d397928.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Systematic Review of Children’s Physical Activity Patterns: Concept, Operational Definitions, Instruments, Statistical Analyses, and Health Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Thayse Natacha Gomes

    (Department of Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão-SE 49100-000, Brazil)

  • Peter T. Katzmarzyk

    (Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70808, USA)

  • Sara Pereira

    (CIFI2D (Centre of Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport), Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal)

  • Mabliny Thuany

    (Department of Physical Education, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão-SE 49100-000, Brazil)

  • Martyn Standage

    (Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK)

  • José Maia

    (CIFI2D (Centre of Research, Education, Innovation and Intervention in Sport), Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, 4200-450 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

Despite the widespread use of the expression “physical activity pattern” (PAP), there apparently is no general consensus regarding its definition. This systematic review aimed to examine available research focussing on (1) definitions of PAP, (2) instruments/techniques used to describe PAP, (3) statistical approaches used to analyse PAP, and (4) implications of PAP on children’s health. A systematic review of the available literature was done to identify studies published up to October 2019, and 76 studies were eligible. None of the studies presented a formal definition of PAP; a wide range of instruments were used to investigate children’s PAP, and most of the revised studies did not explicitly present a formal statistical model to define PAP. Twenty-four papers purported to examine associations between PAP and health indicators. The review highlights no consensus on a clear PAP definition whatever the instrument used to capture it, and we did not find any agreement regarding how best to analyse PAP. We suggest that PAP should be used when targeting the investigation of similarities/dissimilarities, as well as stabilities and/or changes in children’s PA at an intra-personal level. In sum, PAP should be used to best describe individual streams of behaviours, and not exclusively PA levels/intensities.

Suggested Citation

  • Thayse Natacha Gomes & Peter T. Katzmarzyk & Sara Pereira & Mabliny Thuany & Martyn Standage & José Maia, 2020. "A Systematic Review of Children’s Physical Activity Patterns: Concept, Operational Definitions, Instruments, Statistical Analyses, and Health Implications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-25, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5837-:d:397928
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5837/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/16/5837/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    2. Atanu Sengupta & Sanjoy De, 2020. "Review of Literature," India Studies in Business and Economics, in: Assessing Performance of Banks in India Fifty Years After Nationalization, chapter 0, pages 15-30, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lydia Novoszel & Tina Wakolbinger, 2022. "Meta-analysis of Supply Chain Disruption Research," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-25, March.
    2. Arelys López‐Concepción & Ana I. Gil‐Lacruz & Isabel Saz‐Gil, 2022. "Stakeholder engagement, Csr development and Sdgs compliance: A systematic review from 2015 to 2021," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(1), pages 19-31, January.
    3. Alys McAlpine & Ligia Kiss & Cathy Zimmerman & Zaid Chalabi, 2021. "Agent-based modeling for migration and modern slavery research: a systematic review," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 243-332, May.
    4. Nadire Cavus & Karwan Al-Dosakee & Abdo Abdi & Siyar Sadiq, 2021. "The Utilization of Augmented Reality Technology for Sustainable Skill Development for People with Special Needs: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-22, September.
    5. Yue Guiling & Siti Aisyah Panatik & Mohammad Saipol Mohd Sukor & Noraini Rusbadrol & Li Cunlin, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research on Organizational Citizenship Behavior From 2000 to 2019," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.
    6. Roksana Jahan Tumpa & Samer Skaik & Miriam Ham & Ghulam Chaudhry, 2022. "A Holistic Overview of Studies to Improve Group-Based Assessments in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, August.
    7. Rebeca Soler-Costa & Pablo Lafarga-Ostáriz & Marta Mauri-Medrano & Antonio-José Moreno-Guerrero, 2021. "Netiquette: Ethic, Education, and Behavior on Internet—A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Alejandro Carbonell-Alcocer & Juan Romero-Luis & Manuel Gertrudix, 2021. "A Methodological Assessment Based on a Systematic Review of Circular Economy and Bioenergy Addressed by Education and Communication," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-37, April.
    9. Paula Benevene & Ilaria Buonomo & Eric Kong & Martina Pansini & Maria Luisa Farnese, 2021. "Management of Green Intellectual Capital: Evidence-Based Literature Review and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-22, July.
    10. Diego Sánchez-González & Fermina Rojo-Pérez & Vicente Rodríguez-Rodríguez & Gloria Fernández-Mayoralas, 2020. "Environmental and Psychosocial Interventions in Age-Friendly Communities and Active Ageing: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-34, November.
    11. Vasja Roblek & Maja Meško & Mirjana Pejić Bach & Oshane Thorpe & Polona Šprajc, 2020. "The Interaction between Internet, Sustainable Development, and Emergence of Society 5.0," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-27, September.
    12. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    13. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    14. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    15. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    16. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    17. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    18. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    19. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    20. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:16:p:5837-:d:397928. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.