Objective: Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March–June 2020). Results: Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to “maintain training,” and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is “okay to not train during lockdown,” with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered “coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)” to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for “general fitness and health maintenance” during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. Conclusions: COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete classification). Higher classification athletes had the strongest desire to “maintain” training and the greatest opposition to “not training” during lockdowns. These higher classification athletes retained training specificity to a greater degree than others, probably because of preferential access to limited training resources. More higher classification athletes considered “coaching by correspondence” as sufficient than did lower classification athletes. These lockdown-mediated changes in training were not conducive to maintenance or progression of athletes’ physical capacities and were also likely detrimental to athletes’ mental health. These data can be used by policy makers, athletes, and their multidisciplinary teams to modulate their practice, with a degree of individualization, in the current and continued pandemic-related scenario. Furthermore, the data may drive training-related educational resources for athletes and their multidisciplinary teams. Such upskilling would provide athletes with evidence to inform their training modifications in response to germane situations (e.g., COVID related, injury, and illness).

Objective: We assessed the direct and indirect relationships between sleep quality, mental health, and physical activity with quality of life (QOL) in college and university students.Methods: In a cross-sectional design, 3,380 college students (60% females; age = 22.7 ± 5.4) from four continents (Africa: 32%; America: 5%; Asia: 46%; and Europe: 15%; others: 2%) completed the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI); Insomnia Severity Index (ISI); Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS); the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale 21 (DASS); the International Physical Activity Questionnaire short-form (IPAQ); and the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF (WHOQOL-Brief).Results: We showed that sleep quality, insomnia, and depression had direct negative effects on the physical domain of QOL (β = −0.22, −0.19, −0.31, respectively, p < 0.001). There was a strong negative direct association between depression and the psychological domain of QOL (β = −0.60, z = −22.21, p < 0.001). Both stress and PSQI had direct effects on social relationships QOL (β = 0.11; z = 4.09; and β = −0.13; z = −7.40, respectively, p < 0.001). However, depression had the strongest direct impact on social relationships QOL (β = −0.41, z = −15.79, p < 0.001).Conclusion: The overall QOL of university students is associated with their sleep quality, mental health, and physical activity warranting further interventional studies aiming at improving students’ quality of life.

The objective of this study was to determine and compare leg asymmetry between preferred dominant and non-dominant legs in muscular power and balance among sub-elite soccer (football) players in Qatar. Thirty-two professional local soccer players from the Qatar Stars League (Second Division) participated in the study (23.1 ± 6.1 years). They were classified according to their preferred dominant leg (preferred leg to kick the ball). Twenty-two players had a right dominant leg, and the remaining ten had a left dominant leg. Countermovement jump (CMJ) was used to measure unilateral and bilateral vertical jump performances. The Y-balance test (YBT) was used to assess dynamic balance. No significant differences were found between the dominant and non-dominant leg for CMJ flight height (p > 0.05; asymmetry index (AI) = 1.83 ± 11.46) or the relative and absolute reach distance derived from the YBT (p > 0.05; AI (relative) = −0.45 ± 9.68, AI (absolute) = −0.60 ± 12.3). Bilateral asymmetry in dynamic balance was not significant for any of the anterior, posteromedial, or the posterolateral reaching directions (p > 0.05). The selected football players demonstrated an acceptable level of leg symmetry for power and dynamic balance. These findings may prove helpful for the assessment and evaluation of talents and should help to develop and optimize training regimes.

Objective Sleep is a fundamental physiological process essential for maintaining overall health and optimal functioning across various cognitive, emotional, and physical domains. To cross-sectionally investigate the sleep pattern among college students according to geographical location, gender, and age. Materials and Methods A total of 3,475 valid responses, 3,366 from 4 continents (Africa – n = 1,095; America – n = 182; Asia – n = 1,562; Europe – n = 527); 2,075 from female students and 1,369 from male students (n = 3,444), were analyzed. Sleep quality, insomnia, and daytime sleepiness were assessed using validated questionnaires (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI], Insomnia Severity Index [ISI], and Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS], respectively). Results Students from all continents had poor sleep quality, and there were inter-countries differences in sleep quality. The frequency of poor sleep quality and subclinical-to-clinical insomnia were higher among Asian (AsiS) and African students (AfS) compared with American (AmS) and European students (EuS) (p < 0.05). Asian students had a greater frequency of excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) compared with those from other continents (p < 0.05). Females showed higher mean ISI scores (p < 0.001) as well as a greater frequency of poor sleep quality (p < 0.05), subclinical-to-clinical insomnia (p < 0.05), and EDS (p < 0.05) compared with males. Insufficient sleep duration was more frequent in older-aged groups (i.e., 26–30, 31–35, and > 36 years) compared with the ≤ 20 years age group (p < 0.05). Excessive daytime sleepiness was more frequent in younger age groups (i.e., ≤ 20 and 21–25 years) versus the > 36 years (p < 0.05) group. There were no significant differences in the frequency of various degrees of insomnia across age groups. Conclusion Our results suggest the need for tailored interventions for addressing sleep disturbances among college students of all age groups, with a specific focus on AsiS and AfS, as well as female students.

Objective Our objective was to explore the training-related knowledge, beliefs, and practices of athletes and the influence of lockdowns in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods Athletes (n = 12,526, comprising 13% world class, 21% international, 36% national, 24% state, and 6% recreational) completed an online survey that was available from 17 May to 5 July 2020 and explored their training behaviors (training knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and practices), including specific questions on their training intensity, frequency, and session duration before and during lockdown (March–June 2020). Results Overall, 85% of athletes wanted to “maintain training,” and 79% disagreed with the statement that it is “okay to not train during lockdown,” with a greater prevalence for both in higher-level athletes. In total, 60% of athletes considered “coaching by correspondence (remote coaching)” to be sufficient (highest amongst world-class athletes). During lockdown, < 40% were able to maintain sport-specific training (e.g., long endurance [39%], interval training [35%], weightlifting [33%], plyometric exercise [30%]) at pre-lockdown levels (higher among world-class, international, and national athletes), with most (83%) training for “general fitness and health maintenance” during lockdown. Athletes trained alone (80%) and focused on bodyweight (65%) and cardiovascular (59%) exercise/training during lockdown. Compared with before lockdown, most athletes reported reduced training frequency (from between five and seven sessions per week to four or fewer), shorter training sessions (from ≥ 60 to < 60 min), and lower sport-specific intensity (~ 38% reduction), irrespective of athlete classification. Conclusions COVID-19-related lockdowns saw marked reductions in athletic training specificity, intensity, frequency, and duration, with notable within-sample differences (by athlete classification). Higher classification athletes had the strongest desire to “maintain” training and the greatest opposition to “not training” during lockdowns. These higher classification athletes retained training specificity to a greater degree than others, probably because of preferential access to limited training resources. More higher classification athletes considered “coaching by correspondence” as sufficient than did lower classification athletes. These lockdown-mediated changes in training were not conducive to maintenance or progression of athletes’ physical capacities and were also likely detrimental to athletes’ mental health. These data can be used by policy makers, athletes, and their multidisciplinary teams to modulate their practice, with a degree of individualization, in the current and continued pandemic-related scenario. Furthermore, the data may drive training-related educational resources for athletes and their multidisciplinary teams. Such upskilling would provide athletes with evidence to inform their training modifications in response to germane situations (e.g., COVID related, injury, and illness).