Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 The relationship between movement behaviours and fitness

From: Systematic review of the relationships between combinations of movement behaviours and health indicators in the early years (0-4 years)

No. of studies Design Quality assessment No. of participants Absolute effect Quality
Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other
Mean baseline age of 4.48 years. Data were collected by cross-sectional (n = 1) study design. Fitness was assessed using the PREFIT fitness test battery, and included cardiorespiratory fitness (i.e., 20-m shuttle run), muscular fitness (i.e., handgrip strength and standing long jump), and speed-agility (i.e., 4 × 10-m shuttle run).
1 Cross-sectionala Serious risk of biasb No serious inconsistency No serious indirectness No serious imprecision Exposure/ indicator gradientc 307 SB + PA: Replacing SB with LPA was unfavourably associated with standing long jump, and not associated with 20-m shuttle performance, handgrip strength, or 4 × 10-m shuttle performance. Replacing SB with MPA was not associated with 20-m shuttle performance, handgrip strength, standing long jump, or 4 × 10-m shuttle performance. Replacing SB with VPA was favourably associated with 20-m shuttle performance, standing long jump, and 4 × 10-m shuttle performance, and not associated with handgrip strength. VERY LOWd
  1. LPA light-intensity physical activity, MPA moderate-intensity physical activity, MVPA moderate- to vigorous-intensity activity, PA physical activity, SB sedentary behaviour, TPA total physical activity, VPA vigorous-intensity physical activity
  2. a Includes 1 cross-sectional study [32]
  3. b Serious risk of bias. This study used convenience sampling for recruitment. As well, the analysis relied on predictive modelling (i.e., isotemporal substitution) instead of explanatory modelling (e.g., linear regression)
  4. c Exposure/indicator gradient. A gradient for higher TPA, MVPA, VPA with higher fitness was observed
  5. d Quality of evidence was downgraded from “low” to “very low” due to serious risk of bias; because of this limitation, was not upgraded for an exposure/indicator gradient