Limits...
Revising on the run or studying on the sofa: prospective associations between physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and exam results in British adolescents.

Corder K, Atkin AJ, Bamber DJ, Brage S, Dunn VJ, Ekelund U, Owens M, van Sluijs EM, Goodyer IM - Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act (2015)

Bottom Line: GCSE results at 16y were obtained from national records.PA was not associated with academic performance.Concerns that encouraging more physical activity may result in decreased academic performance seem unfounded.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Box 285 Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. klc29@medschl.cam.ac.uk.

ABSTRACT

Background: We investigated prospective associations between physical activity/sedentary behaviour (PA/SED) and General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) results in British adolescents.

Methods: Exposures were objective PA/SED and self-reported sedentary behaviours (screen (TV, Internet, Computer Games)/non-screen (homework, reading)) measured in 845 adolescents (14·5y ± 0·5y; 43·6 % male). GCSE results at 16y were obtained from national records. Associations between exposures and academic performance (total exam points) were assessed using multilevel mixed-effects linear regression adjusted for mood, BMI z-score, deprivation, sex, season and school; potential interactions were investigated.

Results: PA was not associated with academic performance. One-hour more accelerometer-assessed SED was associated with (β(95 % CI)) 6·9(1·5,12·4) more GCSE points. An extra hour of screen time was associated with 9.3(-14·3,-4·3) fewer points whereas an extra hour of non-screen time (reading/homework) was associated with 23·1(14·6,31·6) more points. Screen time was still associated with poorer scores after adjusting for objective PA/SED and reading/homework.

Conclusions: An extra hour/day of screen time at 14·5y is approximately equivalent to two fewer GCSE grades (e.g., from B to D) at 16y. Strategies to achieve the right balance between screen and non-screen time may be important for improving academic performance. Concerns that encouraging more physical activity may result in decreased academic performance seem unfounded.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Results are from two level linear regression models adjusted for MFQ, BMI z-score, deprivation, season of physical activity measurement and sex. Results are shown for objectively measured sedentary time and moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and self-reported separate and composite screen time (TV, Internet and Computer Games) and non-screen sedentary behaviours (homework and reading). Values represent adjusted associations (Beta (95 % CI)) between academic achievement (total GCSE points) and sedentary variables (hours/day) and MVPA (mins/day)
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4559961&req=5

Fig1: Results are from two level linear regression models adjusted for MFQ, BMI z-score, deprivation, season of physical activity measurement and sex. Results are shown for objectively measured sedentary time and moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and self-reported separate and composite screen time (TV, Internet and Computer Games) and non-screen sedentary behaviours (homework and reading). Values represent adjusted associations (Beta (95 % CI)) between academic achievement (total GCSE points) and sedentary variables (hours/day) and MVPA (mins/day)

Mentions: Results showing associations between all exposures and academic performance are shown in Table 2 and also displayed in Fig. 1. MVPA was not significantly associated with academic performance. Objectively measured sedentary time was positively associated with academic performance. Differential effects by type of sedentary behaviour were observed. Screen time was associated with fewer total GCSE points but conversely, non-screen sedentary time (reading/homework) was associated with higher academic performance. Self-reported sedentary variables remained significant when mutually adjusted and when adjusted for objective sedentary time and MVPA indicating independent associations with academic performance.Table 2


Revising on the run or studying on the sofa: prospective associations between physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and exam results in British adolescents.

Corder K, Atkin AJ, Bamber DJ, Brage S, Dunn VJ, Ekelund U, Owens M, van Sluijs EM, Goodyer IM - Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act (2015)

Results are from two level linear regression models adjusted for MFQ, BMI z-score, deprivation, season of physical activity measurement and sex. Results are shown for objectively measured sedentary time and moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and self-reported separate and composite screen time (TV, Internet and Computer Games) and non-screen sedentary behaviours (homework and reading). Values represent adjusted associations (Beta (95 % CI)) between academic achievement (total GCSE points) and sedentary variables (hours/day) and MVPA (mins/day)
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4559961&req=5

Fig1: Results are from two level linear regression models adjusted for MFQ, BMI z-score, deprivation, season of physical activity measurement and sex. Results are shown for objectively measured sedentary time and moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and self-reported separate and composite screen time (TV, Internet and Computer Games) and non-screen sedentary behaviours (homework and reading). Values represent adjusted associations (Beta (95 % CI)) between academic achievement (total GCSE points) and sedentary variables (hours/day) and MVPA (mins/day)
Mentions: Results showing associations between all exposures and academic performance are shown in Table 2 and also displayed in Fig. 1. MVPA was not significantly associated with academic performance. Objectively measured sedentary time was positively associated with academic performance. Differential effects by type of sedentary behaviour were observed. Screen time was associated with fewer total GCSE points but conversely, non-screen sedentary time (reading/homework) was associated with higher academic performance. Self-reported sedentary variables remained significant when mutually adjusted and when adjusted for objective sedentary time and MVPA indicating independent associations with academic performance.Table 2

Bottom Line: GCSE results at 16y were obtained from national records.PA was not associated with academic performance.Concerns that encouraging more physical activity may result in decreased academic performance seem unfounded.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Box 285 Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. klc29@medschl.cam.ac.uk.

ABSTRACT

Background: We investigated prospective associations between physical activity/sedentary behaviour (PA/SED) and General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) results in British adolescents.

Methods: Exposures were objective PA/SED and self-reported sedentary behaviours (screen (TV, Internet, Computer Games)/non-screen (homework, reading)) measured in 845 adolescents (14·5y ± 0·5y; 43·6 % male). GCSE results at 16y were obtained from national records. Associations between exposures and academic performance (total exam points) were assessed using multilevel mixed-effects linear regression adjusted for mood, BMI z-score, deprivation, sex, season and school; potential interactions were investigated.

Results: PA was not associated with academic performance. One-hour more accelerometer-assessed SED was associated with (β(95 % CI)) 6·9(1·5,12·4) more GCSE points. An extra hour of screen time was associated with 9.3(-14·3,-4·3) fewer points whereas an extra hour of non-screen time (reading/homework) was associated with 23·1(14·6,31·6) more points. Screen time was still associated with poorer scores after adjusting for objective PA/SED and reading/homework.

Conclusions: An extra hour/day of screen time at 14·5y is approximately equivalent to two fewer GCSE grades (e.g., from B to D) at 16y. Strategies to achieve the right balance between screen and non-screen time may be important for improving academic performance. Concerns that encouraging more physical activity may result in decreased academic performance seem unfounded.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus