Background: Social capital, as a multidimensional social science concept, plays a crucial role in promoting physical activity. Despite numerous studies exploring the relationship between social capital and physical activity, there is still a lack of systematic understanding of how different dimensions of social capital influence physical activity levels. This study aims to systematically review the literature up to 2024 on the relationship between social capital and physical activity, uncover the role of social capital in promoting physical activity, and identify its multidimensional impacts.Methods: We used a combination of search terms including “social capital” and “physical activity” to search the Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, SportDiscus, and PsychINFO databases for English literature published up to March 1, 2024.Results: We identified 2,021 unique articles and reviewed 115 studies that met our inclusion criteria. These studies evaluated various dimensions of social capital, with key dimensions including social participation (34%), social networks (30%), social cohesion (30%), social trust (29%), overall social network (26%), social support (19%), safety (19%), norms of reciprocity (13%), social control (10%), satisfaction with the environment (8%), collective efficacy (4%), norms for physical activity (3%), and voting (1%). In studies exploring the relationship between social capital and physical activity, the majority of positive results in the hypothesized direction were observed in dimensions such as social cohesion, trust, participation, reciprocity, satisfaction with the environment, and overall social networks. In contrast, dimensions such as voting, collective efficacy, safety, control, and physical activity norms predominantly showed null or negative results. The results for social support were mixed, displaying positive, negative, and null outcomes, while findings for social networks were also predominantly mixed.Conclusion: This study reveals the significant role of social capital in promoting physical activity, particularly in the dimensions of social cohesion, social trust, social participation, norms of reciprocity, satisfaction with environment, and overall social network. When designing public health interventions in the future, it is crucial to tailor strategies to different populations and contexts to better leverage social capital in promoting physical activity.

College and university students often exhibit insufficient levels of physical activity, which negatively impacts their health, mental well-being, and academic performance. Social capital has emerged as a potential factor in promoting physical activity. This systematic review, conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines, examines the existing literature on the role of social capital in enhancing physical activity among college and university students. A search of the Web of Science, Scopus, SportDiscus, and PsychINFO databases identified 10 studies published by August 1, 2024, involving 2,700 students, primarily from North America and Europe. The overall quality of the included studies was high, with all scoring above 85% on quality assessments. The findings indicate that social capital, particularly strong social networks, support from family and friends, and high levels of social cohesion, is significantly associated with higher levels of physical activity among college and university students. Social capital may facilitate physical activity in group settings through mechanisms such as emotional support, role modeling, and social norms. Despite limitations within the existing research evidence, such as reliance on self-reported data and cross-sectional study designs, this review suggests that social capital holds potential for promoting physical activity in this population. Future research should prioritize the use of objective measurement tools and longitudinal designs to more accurately assess the long-term effects of social capital and explore how these findings can inform effective interventions.

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of Rhodiola rosea L. (RR) supplementation on endurance performance and key physiological biomarkers, including oxidative stress, muscle damage, inflammation, and metabolic markers. A systematic search of Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, and CNKI identified randomized controlled trials published up to March 20, 2025. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using R software, and methodological quality was appraised using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. Additionally, subgroup analyses assessed the moderating effects of daily RR dosage, training duration, and training status. A total of 26 randomized controlled trials were included, involving 668 healthy participants with a mean age of 22.0 ± 10.7 years. The mean intervention duration was 33 days, with outcome assessments conducted from immediate post-exercise through 24-hour follow-up. The results indicated that RR supplementation significantly improved endurance-related outcomes, including VO_2max (11 studies; ES = 0.32, p < 0.01), time to exhaustion (TTE; 7 studies; ES = 0.38, p < 0.05), and time trial performance (TTP; 5 studies; ES = −0.40, p < 0.05). Antioxidant capacity was enhanced, with increases in total antioxidant capacity (TAC; 6 studies; ES = 0.59, p < 0.05) and superoxide dismutase (SOD; 7 studies; ES = 1.16, p < 0.01), alongside reductions in malondialdehyde (MDA; 6 studies; ES = −1.21, p < 0.001). RR also reduced creatine kinase (CK; 9 studies; ES = −0.84, p < 0.01) and lactate levels (LA; 7 studies; ES = −0.87, p < 0.05), indicating improved metabolic efficiency. No significant effects were observed on inflammatory markers, including interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP). Subgroup analyses indicated greater VO_2max improvements at doses >600 mg/day, with trained individuals exhibiting lower CK levels and more pronounced reductions in CK at early follow-up assessments (≤15 min) post-exercise. In conclusion, RR supplementation is an effective ergogenic aid for enhancing endurance performance and improving physiological biomarkers related to oxidative stress, muscle damage, and metabolic efficiency, though heterogeneity across studies warrants cautious interpretation.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, PROSPERO CRD42024619014.