The aim of this meta-analysis was to quantify the change in sedentary time during the COVID-19 pandemic and its effect on health outcomes in the general population. One thousand six hundred and one articles published after 2019 were retrieved from five databases, of which 64 and 40 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Studies were grouped according to population: children (<18 years), adults (18–64 years) and older adults (>65 years). Average sedentary time was calculated, with sub-analyses performed by country, behaviour type and health outcomes. Children were most affected, increasing their sedentary time by 159.5 ± 142.6 min day−1, followed by adults (+126.9 ± 42.2 min day−1) and older adults (+46.9 ± 22.0 min day−1). There were no sex differences in any age group. Screen time was the only consistently measured behaviour and accounted for 46.8% and 57.2% of total sedentary time in children and adults, respectively. Increases in sedentary time were negatively correlated with global mental health, depression, anxiety and quality of life, irrespective of age. Whilst lockdown negatively affected all age groups, children were more negatively affected than adults or older adults, highlighting this population as a key intervention target. As lockdowns ease worldwide, strategies should be employed to reduce time spent sedentary. Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020208909).

Population-level physical activity (PA) and sedentary time/behaviour estimates represent a significant public health issue exacerbated by restrictions enforced to control COVID-19. This integrative review interrogated available literature to explore the pandemic’s impact on correlates of such behaviours in adults (≥18 years). Five electronic databases were systematically searched in January 2021. Data extracted from 64 articles were assessed for risk-of-bias using the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool, with correlates identified, coded, and themed via thematic analysis. A socioecological model of during-pandemic PA was conceptualized and mapped to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behaviour (COM-B) model of behaviour change mechanisms, which illustrates influences over five levels: Individual (biological)—general health; Individual (psychological)—mental health, cognition, motivation, and behaviour; Social—domestic situation, sociodemographic factors, support, and lifestyle choices; Environmental—resources and area of residence; and Policy—COVID-19-related rules. For sedentary time/behaviour, individual level factors, namely general and mental health, may be important correlates. Neither age or sex were clearly correlated with either behaviour. As we transition into a new normal, understanding which behaviour mechanisms could effectively challenge physical inactivity is essential. Targeting capability on a psychological level may facilitate PA and limit sedentary time/behaviour, whereas, on a physical level, maximizing PA opportunities could be crucial.

Introduction Exercise is widely accepted to improve health, reducing the risk of premature mortality, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer. However, several epidemiological studies suggest that the exercise-longevity relationship may be ‘J’ shaped; with elite athlete’s likely training above these intensity and volume thresholds. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to examine this relationship in former elite athletes. Methods 38,047 English language articles were retrieved from Web of Science, PubMed and SportDiscus databases published after 1970, of which 44 and 24 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Athletes were split into three groups depending on primary sport: Endurance (END), Mixed/Team, or power (POW). Standard mortality ratio’s (SMR) and standard proportionate mortality ratio (SPMR) were obtained, or calculated, and combined for the meta-analysis. Results Athletes lived significantly longer than the general population (male SMR 0.69 [95% CI 0.61–0.78]; female SMR 0.51 [95% CI 0.40–0.65]; both p < 0.01). There was no survival benefit for male POW athletes compared to the general population (SMR 1.04 [95% CI 0.91–1.12]). Although male athlete’s CVD (SMR 0.73 [95% CI 0.62–0.85]) and cancer mortality (SMR 0.75 [95% CI 0.63–0.89]), were significantly reduced compared to the general population, there was no risk-reduction for POW athletes CVD mortality (SMR 1.10 [0.86–1.40]) or END athletes cancer mortality (SMR 0.73 [0.50–1.07]). There was insufficient data to calculate female sport-specific SMR’s. Discussion Overall, athletes live longer and have a reduced incidence of both CVD and cancer mortality compared to the general population, refuting the ‘J’ shape hypothesis. However, different health risks may be apparent according to sports classification, and between sexes, warranting further investigation. Trial registration PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42019130688).

Anaerobic performance in youth has received little attention partly due to the lack of a 'gold-standard' measurement. However, force-velocity-power (F-v-P) profiling recently showed high reliability and validity in trained adults. Therefore, the aim was to determine the reliability of F-v-P profiling in children. Seventy-five children (60 boys, 15 girls; age: 14.1 ± 2.6 years) completed three 30 m sprints. Velocity was measured at 46.875 Hz using a radar device. The F-v-P profile was fitted to a velocity-time curve allowing instantaneous power variables to be calculated. Reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variation (CV), standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest worthwhile change (SWC). High reliability was evident for absolute peak (Ppeak) and mean power (Pmean), Ppeak and Pmean expressed relative to body mass, peak and mean velocity, 30 m sprint time, peak horizontal force (F0), relative F0, mechanical efficiency index and fatigue rate (ICC: 0.75-0.88; CV: 1.9-9.4%) with time to peak power demonstrating moderate reliability (ICC: 0.50; CV: 9.5%). The F-v-P model demonstrated at least moderate reliability for all variables. This therefore provides a potential alternative for paediatric researchers assessing sprint performance and the underlying kinetics.

Introduction: High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) and Constant-Intensity Endurance Training (CIET) improves peak oxygen uptake (V O2) similarly in adults; but in children this remains unclear, as does the interaction with maturity. Methods: Thirty-seven boys formed three groups: HIIT (football; n = 14; 14.3 ± 3.1 years), CIET (distance runners; n = 12; 13.1 ± 2.5 years) and a control (CON) group (n = 11; 13.7 ± 3.2 years). Peak V O2 and gas exchange threshold (GET) were determined from a ramp test with anaerobic performance quantified using a 30 m sprint pre-and-post a three-month training cycle. Maturation was assessed using maturity offset equations. Results: The HIIT groups peak V O2 was significantly higher than the CON group pre (peak V O2: 2.54±0.63 l•min -1 vs 2.03±0.53 l•min -1 , d = 0.88; GET: 1.41±0.26 l•min -1 vs 1.13±0.29 l•min -1 , d = 1.02) and post-training (peak V O2: 2.63±0.73 l•min -1 vs 2.08±0.64 l•min -1 , d = 0.80; GET: 1.32±0.33 l•min -1 vs 1.15±0.38 l•min -1 , d = 0.48). All groups showed a similar magnitude of change over the three-month training period (p>0.05). Conclusion:HIIT was not superior to CIET for improving aerobic or anaerobic parameters in adolescents. Secondly, pre-and post-pubertal participants demonstrated similar trainability, highlighting no maturity and training interaction.