2017
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.268998
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Level Of Physical Activity Of Physical Education Students In Poland And Ireland

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…20 The studies by Kościuczuk et al 28 carried out using the same tool in a similar group of dietetics and physiotherapy students showed that the summary PA was on average 3014.5 MET-min/week (±1564.8), being therefore far lower than the mean value obtained in the reported study (which was 7322.29 MET-min/ week). In contrast, the result obtained in the present study is closer to the findings by Górski et al 29 in a group of Polish and Irish physical education students, in which the total PA level was 11477 (±6331) and 7205 (±4787) MET-min/ week respectively. The PA level was not correlated, nor was it a predictor of the majority of the assessed body composition parameters, except the volume of VAT in women (Table 2) (the correlation coefficient -0.27, hence clear but low linear dependence; the number of women (n = 71) guarantees the significance of the correlation coefficient).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…20 The studies by Kościuczuk et al 28 carried out using the same tool in a similar group of dietetics and physiotherapy students showed that the summary PA was on average 3014.5 MET-min/week (±1564.8), being therefore far lower than the mean value obtained in the reported study (which was 7322.29 MET-min/ week). In contrast, the result obtained in the present study is closer to the findings by Górski et al 29 in a group of Polish and Irish physical education students, in which the total PA level was 11477 (±6331) and 7205 (±4787) MET-min/ week respectively. The PA level was not correlated, nor was it a predictor of the majority of the assessed body composition parameters, except the volume of VAT in women (Table 2) (the correlation coefficient -0.27, hence clear but low linear dependence; the number of women (n = 71) guarantees the significance of the correlation coefficient).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%