Pacing places a high demand on intellectual functioning and has been found useful for classification of athletes with intellectual impairments (II). This may also be true in open-loop sports like basketball. The aim of the current study was to investigate the pacing behaviour of basketball players with and without II. Using time-motion analysis, the activity of elite basketball players with II (n=37) and amateur players without II (n=34) was coded into four movement categories over eight periods of each game: standing, walking, running and jumping. Following two-way ANOVA, an effect of group showed differences between groups in duration and frequency of the movement categories within each period of the games.Additionally, an effect of time suggested that players in both groups paced their performances. However, no interaction was found, indicating that pacing may not be different between groups. In conclusion, the results suggest that due to the dynamic nature of basketball, the included players paced more intuitively by responding to environmental cues and using less deliberate planning. The players with II demonstrated slower games, which may be due to an impaired ability to make quick moment-to-moment deliberate decisions. These skills should be further studied in the context of evidence-based classification.

IntroductionPhysical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policymakers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5–19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB.Methods and analysisA search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane’s RoB V.2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health’s tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance.Systematic review registrationCRD42021282874.

Purpose This study aimed to investigate whether (meta-) cognitive functions underpin the development of the self-regulated distribution of effort during exercise (i.e., pacing) throughout adolescence. Methods Participants included 18 adolescents (9 girls, 15.6 ± 2.5 yr old) and 26 adults (13 women, 26.8 ± 3.1 yr old), all recreationally active but unfamiliar with time trial cycling. The (meta-) cognitive functions involved in preexercise planning were quantified by calculating the difference between estimated and actual finish time during a 4-km cycling time trial. The capability to monitor and adapt one’s effort distribution during exercise was measured during a 7-min submaximal trial, in which the participants were tasked with adhering to a set submaximal goal velocity either with (0–5 min) or without (5–7 min) additional feedback provided by the researcher. Analyses included between-group comparisons (ANOVA) and within-group comparisons (correlation) (P < 0.05). Results Adolescents were less accurate in their estimation of the task duration. The adolescents’ overestimation of task duration of the 4-km time trial was accompanied by pacing behavior characteristics resembling a longer trial (i.e., more even power output distribution, lower RPE, more pronounced end-spurt). Contrary to the adults, the adolescents deviated relatively more from the goal velocity during the 7-min submaximal trial, when no additional feedback was provided by the researcher. Within the adolescent group, estimation of task duration accuracy (r = 0.48) and adherence to goal velocity (r = 0.59) correlated with age. Conclusions The (meta-) cognitive functions involved in the preexercise planning and the monitoring and adaptation of the distribution of effort during exercise underpin the development of pacing behavior during adolescence. Feedback from the (social) environment can be used to aid the monitoring and adaptation of effort expenditure in adolescents.

No abstract