32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Exploring the impact of COVID-19 on the movement behaviors of children and youth: A scoping review of evidence after the first year

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          The objective of this scoping review was to summarize systematically the available literature investigating the relationships between the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and movement behaviors (physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep) of school-aged children (aged 5−11 years) and youth (aged 12−17 years) in the first year of the COVID-19 outbreak.

          Methods

          Searches for published literature were conducted across 6 databases on 2 separate search dates (November 25, 2020, and January 27, 2021). Results were screened and extracted by 2 reviewers (DCP and KR) independently, using Covidence. Basic numeric analysis and content analysis were undertaken to present thematically the findings of included studies according to the associated impact on each movement behavior.

          Results

          A total of 1486 records were extracted from database searches; of those, 150 met inclusion criteria and were included for analysis. Of 150 articles, 110 were empirical studies examining physical activity ( n = 77), sedentary behavior/screen time ( n = 58), and sleep ( n = 55). Results consistently reported declines in physical-activity time, increases in screen time and total sedentary behavior, shifts to later bed and wake times, and increases in sleep duration. The reported impacts on movement behaviors were greater for youth than for children.

          Conclusion

          The COVID-19 pandemic is related to changes in the quantity and nature of physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep among children and youth. There is an urgent need for policy makers, practitioners, and researchers to develop solutions for attenuating adverse changes in physical activity and screen time among children and youth.

          Graphical Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references185

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Scoping studies: advancing the methodology

            Background Scoping studies are an increasingly popular approach to reviewing health research evidence. In 2005, Arksey and O'Malley published the first methodological framework for conducting scoping studies. While this framework provides an excellent foundation for scoping study methodology, further clarifying and enhancing this framework will help support the consistency with which authors undertake and report scoping studies and may encourage researchers and clinicians to engage in this process. Discussion We build upon our experiences conducting three scoping studies using the Arksey and O'Malley methodology to propose recommendations that clarify and enhance each stage of the framework. Recommendations include: clarifying and linking the purpose and research question (stage one); balancing feasibility with breadth and comprehensiveness of the scoping process (stage two); using an iterative team approach to selecting studies (stage three) and extracting data (stage four); incorporating a numerical summary and qualitative thematic analysis, reporting results, and considering the implications of study findings to policy, practice, or research (stage five); and incorporating consultation with stakeholders as a required knowledge translation component of scoping study methodology (stage six). Lastly, we propose additional considerations for scoping study methodology in order to support the advancement, application and relevance of scoping studies in health research. Summary Specific recommendations to clarify and enhance this methodology are outlined for each stage of the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Continued debate and development about scoping study methodology will help to maximize the usefulness and rigor of scoping study findings within healthcare research and practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach

              Background Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate. Results Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions. Conclusions Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Sport Health Sci
                J Sport Health Sci
                Journal of Sport and Health Science
                Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.
                2095-2546
                2213-2961
                6 July 2021
                December 2021
                6 July 2021
                : 10
                : 6
                : 675-689
                Affiliations
                [a ]School of Kinesiology, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada
                [b ]School of Health and Human Performance, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada
                [c ]Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 5B2, Canada
                [d ]Department of Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author.
                Article
                S2095-2546(21)00072-7
                10.1016/j.jshs.2021.07.001
                8687706
                34237456
                1dae2463-8614-4bba-b700-f85074a666c4
                © 2021 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Shanghai University of Sport.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 8 April 2021
                : 14 May 2021
                : 9 June 2021
                Categories
                Review

                pandemic,physical activity,screen time,sedentary,sleep
                pandemic, physical activity, screen time, sedentary, sleep

                Comments

                Comment on this article