Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 609

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global participation in sport and leisure-time physical activities: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Hulteen, Ryan M., Smith, Jordan J., Morgan, Philip J., Barnett, Lisa M., Hallal, Pedro C., Colyvas, Kim, Lubans, David R.·2017·Preventive Medicine

Abstract

This review aimed to determine the most popular physical activities performed by children, adolescents, and adults globally. Statistic bureau websites and article databases Scopus, ProQuest, SPORTDiscus, and Science Direct were searched between November 17th, 2014 and April 31st, 2015. Eligible studies were published in the last 10years with participation rates for specific physical activities among individuals five years or older. Data extraction for included articles (n=64) was assessed independently and agreed upon by two authors. A random-effects model was used to calculate participation rates in specific activities for each age group and region. In total 73,304 articles were retrieved and 64 articles representing 47 countries were included in the final meta-analysis. Among adults, walking was the most popular activity in the Americas (18.9%; 95% CI 10.2 to 32.5), Eastern Mediterranean (15.0%; 95% CI 5.8 to 33.6), Southeast Asia (39.3%; 95% CI 0.9 to 98.0) and Western Pacific (41.8%; 95% CI 25.2 to 60.6). In Europe and Africa, soccer (10.0%; 95% CI 6.5 to 15.1) and running (9.3%; 95% CI 0.9 to 53.9), respectively, were top activities. Child and adolescent participation results were highly dependent upon region. American youth team sport participation was high, while youth from the Eastern Mediterranean and Western Pacific were more likely to report participation in lifelong physical activities. Global data for adults reflects a consistent pattern of participation in running and walking. Among all age groups and regions soccer was popular. In children and adolescents, preferences were variable between regions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.11.027

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hulteen, R. M., Smith, J. J., Morgan, P. J., Barnett, L. M., Hallal, P. C., Colyvas, K., & Lubans, D. R.
Venue
Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-02
Volume
95
Pages
14-25
ISSN
0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2559876241
Cited by
609
References
14
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.