Physical inactivity commonly occurs throughout one’s life, particularly during adolescence and young adulthood. Multiple factors can negatively influence participation in physical activity, but there has been no review examining the barriers to physical activity among high school and university students. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to summarize evidence of barriers to the practice of physical activity among high school and university students. The literature search was conducted without time limits using five databases, including CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus. In total, 59 studies (37 with high school students [n = 22,908] and 22 with university students [n = 15,411]) were included. The main barriers identified in high school and university students were lack of time, lack of motivation, and lack of accessible places. These findings may be useful in designing and implementing evidence-informed interventions and programs for physical activity promotion in students.

Researching a topic and generating an academic paper is a nuanced skill. It can take months or years to produce and publish one, if it is ever published at all. What if there were a way to make this happen instantly? Artificial intelligence (AI) may hold a flame to quickly analyse a research topic and generate an academic paper. There are many forms of AI; this editorial discusses natural language model-based AI, such as ChatGPT, and their potential ability to generate academic papers.

Purpose: The objective of this systematic review was to 1) determine how studies evaluated napping behavior in athletes (frequency, duration, timing and measurement); 2) explore how napping impacted physical performance, cognitive performance, perceptual measures (eg, fatigue, muscle soreness, sleepiness and alertness), psychological state and night-time sleep in athletes. Methods: Five bibliographic databases were searched from database inception to 11 August 2020. Observational and experimental studies comprising able-bodied athletes (mean age ≥ 12 years), published in English, in peer-reviewed journal papers were included. The Downs and Black Quality Assessment Checklist was used for quality appraisal. Results: Thirty-seven studies were identified of moderate quality. Most studies did not include consistent information regarding nap frequency, duration, and timing. Napping may be beneficial for a range of outcomes that benefit athletes (eg, physical and cognitive performance, perceptual measures, psychological state and night-time sleep). In addition, napping presents athletes with the opportunity to supplement their night-time sleep without compromising sleep quality. Conclusion: Athletes may consider napping between 20 to 90 min in duration and between 13:00 and 16:00 hours. Finally, athletes should allow 30 min to reduce sleep inertia prior to training or competition to obtain better performance outcomes. Future studies should include comprehensive recordings of nap duration and quality, and consider using sleep over a 24 hour period (daytime naps and night-time sleep period), specifically using objective methods of sleep assessment (eg, polysomnography/actigraphy).

Background: Several reviews have examined the health benefits of participation in specific sports, such as baseball, cricket, cross-country skiing, cycling, downhill skiing, football, golf, judo, rugby, running and swimming. However, new primary studies on the topic have recently been published, and the respective meta-analytic evidence needs to be updated. Objectives: To systematically review, summarise and appraise evidence on physical health benefits of participation in different recreational sports. Methods: Searches for journal articles were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SpoLit, SPORTDiscus, Sports Medicine & Education Index and Web of Science. We included longitudinal and intervention studies investigating physical health outcomes associated with participation in a given sport among generally healthy adults without disability. Results: A total of 136 papers from 76 studies conducted among 2.6 million participants were included in the review. Our meta-analyses of available evidence found that: (1) cycling reduces the risk of coronary heart disease by 16% (pooled hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80, 0.89), all-cause mortality by 21% (HR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.84), cancer mortality by 10% (HR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.85, 0.96) and cardiovascular mortality by 20% (HR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.86); (2) football has favourable effects on body composition, blood lipids, fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, cardiovascular function at rest, cardiorespiratory fitness and bone strength (p < 0.050); (3) handball has favourable effects on body composition and cardiorespiratory fitness (p < 0.050); (4) running reduces the risk of all-cause mortality by 23% (HR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.70, 0.85), cancer mortality by 20% (HR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.89) and cardiovascular mortality by 27% (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.57, 0.94) and improves body composition, cardiovascular function at rest and cardiorespiratory fitness (p < 0.010); and (5) swimming reduces the risk of all-cause mortality by 24% (HR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.63, 0.92) and improves body composition and blood lipids (p < 0.010). Conclusions: A range of physical health benefits are associated with participation in recreational cycling, football, handball, running and swimming. More studies are needed to enable meta-analyses of health benefits of participation in other sports. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021234839.