Background: The Global Matrix 4.0 on physical activity (PA) for children and adolescents was developed to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the global variation in children’s and adolescents’ (5–17 y) PA, related measures, and key sources of influence. The objectives of this article were (1) to summarize the findings from the Global Matrix 4.0 Report Cards, (2) to compare indicators across countries, and (3) to explore trends related to the Human Development Index and geo-cultural regions. Methods: A total of 57 Report Card teams followed a harmonized process to grade the 10 common PA indicators. An online survey was conducted to collect Report Card Leaders’ top 3 priorities for each PA indicator and their opinions on how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted child and adolescent PA indicators in their country. Results: Overall Physical Activity was the indicator with the lowest global average grade (D), while School and Community and Environment were the indicators with the highest global average grade (C+). An overview of the global situation in terms of surveillance and prevalence is provided for all 10 common PA indicators, followed by priorities and examples to support the development of strategies and policies internationally. Conclusions: The Global Matrix 4.0 represents the largest compilation of children’s and adolescents’ PA indicators to date. While variation in data sources informing the grades across countries was observed, this initiative highlighted low PA levels in children and adolescents globally. Measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, local/international conflicts, climate change, and economic change threaten to worsen this situation.

The worldwide prevalence of insufficient physical activity (PA) and prolonged sedentary behavior (SB) were high before the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Measures that were taken by governments (such as home confinement) to control the spread of COVID-19 may have affected levels of PA and SB. This cross-sectional study among South American adults during the first months of COVID-19 aims to (i) compare sitting time (ST), screen exposure, moderate PA (MPA), vigorous PA (VPA), and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) before and during lockdown to sociodemographic correlates and (ii) to assess the impact of lockdown on combinations of groups reporting meeting/not-meeting PA recommendations and engaging/not-engaging excessive ST (≥7 h/day). Bivariate associations, effect sizes, and multivariable linear regressions were used. Adults from Argentina (n = 575) and Chile (n = 730) completed an online survey with questions regarding demographics, lifestyle factors, and chronic diseases. Mean reductions of 42.7 and 22.0 min./day were shown in MPA and VPA, respectively; while increases of 212.4 and 164.3 min./day were observed in screen and ST, respectively. Those who met PA recommendations and spent <7 h/day of ST experienced greatest changes, reporting greater than 3 h/day higher ST and more than 1.5 h/day lower MVPA. Findings from the present study suggest that efforts to promote PA to South American adults during and after COVID-19 restrictions are needed.

Lifestyle has changed in the last century increasingly promoting sedentary behaviors. Prolonged sitting time is related to increased all-cause mortality risk. Therefore, scientific research aimed at understanding the effects of sitting on health has increased to find effective interventions that can be carried out in life domains (study, work, transport, and free time). The interaction between physical activity and sitting time plays a key role in the development of strategies to promote physical activity practice and reduce sedentary behavior. Accepting that the modern societies incite to spend long periods seated, the aim seems to find a balance between all the areas during the 24 h of the day. Maintaining sleep time, reducing screen leisure time to 3 h/day, and breaking prolonged sedentary time for 2–3 min every 30 min-1 h of sitting, as well as reaching the physical activity recommendation may help counteract the potential negative effect of too much sitting time. Governments must provide active free time options to promote active leisure time and help reduce screen time. At workplaces, managers and companies should encourage sitting breaks and work standing options, and for the special population such as children or older adults, new strategies must be considered to reduce sitting time.

No abstract