↓ Skip to main content

Physical Activity for Cognitive and Mental Health in Youth: A Systematic Review of Mechanisms

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatrics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
62 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
89 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
319 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Physical Activity for Cognitive and Mental Health in Youth: A Systematic Review of Mechanisms
Published in
Pediatrics, August 2016
DOI 10.1542/peds.2016-1642
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Lubans, Justin Richards, Charles Hillman, Guy Faulkner, Mark Beauchamp, Michael Nilsson, Paul Kelly, Jordan Smith, Lauren Raine, Stuart Biddle, Lubans, David, Richards, Justin, Hillman, Charles, Faulkner, Guy, Beauchamp, Mark, Nilsson, Michael, Kelly, Paul, Smith, Jordan, Raine, Lauren, Biddle, Stuart, D. Lubans, J. Richards, C. Hillman, G. Faulkner, M. Beauchamp, M. Nilsson, P. Kelly, J. Smith, L. Raine, S. Biddle

Abstract

Physical activity can improve cognitive and mental health, but the underlying mechanisms have not been established. To present a conceptual model explaining the mechanisms for the effect of physical activity on cognitive and mental health in young people and to conduct a systematic review of the evidence. Six electronic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Ovid Medline, SportDiscus, and Embase) were used. School-, home-, or community-based physical activity intervention or laboratory-based exercise interventions were assessed. Studies were eligible if they reported statistical analyses of changes in the following: (1) cognition or mental health; and (2) neurobiological, psychosocial, and behavioral mechanisms. Data relating to methods, assessment period, participant characteristics, intervention type, setting, and facilitator/delivery were extracted. Twenty-five articles reporting results from 22 studies were included. Mechanisms studied were neurobiological (6 studies), psychosocial (18 studies), and behavioral (2 studies). Significant changes in at least 1 potential neurobiological mechanism were reported in 5 studies, and significant effects for at least 1 cognitive outcome were also found in 5 studies. One of 2 studies reported a significant effect for self-regulation, but neither study reported a significant impact on mental health. Small number of studies and high levels of study heterogeneity. The strongest evidence was found for improvements in physical self-perceptions, which accompanied enhanced self-esteem in the majority of studies measuring these outcomes. Few studies examined neurobiological and behavioral mechanisms, and we were unable to draw conclusions regarding their role in enhancing cognitive and mental health.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 62 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 319 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 317 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 17%
Unspecified 45 14%
Student > Bachelor 45 14%
Researcher 37 12%
Other 83 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 69 22%
Sports and Recreations 63 20%
Psychology 61 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 44 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 8%
Other 58 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2017.
All research outputs
#295,727
of 12,088,915 outputs
Outputs from Pediatrics
#1,565
of 11,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,757
of 262,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatrics
#58
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,088,915 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,705 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.