A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Association and Differences between Aerobic Threshold and Point of Optimal Fat Oxidation

Over the past two decades, scientists have attempted to evaluate whether the point of maximal fat oxidation (FATmax) and the aerobic threshold (AerT) are connected. The existence of such a relationship would allow a more tailored training approach for athletes while improving the efficacy of individualized exercise prescriptions when treating numerous health-related issues. However, studies have reported conflicting results, and this issue remains unresolved. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed: (i) to examine the strength of the association between FATmax and AerT by using the effect size (ES) of correlation coefficient (r) and standardized mean difference (SMD); (ii) to identify potential moderators and their influence on ES variability. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021239351) and ClinicalTrials (NCT03789045). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched and fourteen articles, consisting of overall 35 ES for r and 26 ES for SMD were included. Obtained ESs were analyzed using a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis. Our results support the presence of a significant association between FATmax and AerT exercise intensities. In conclusion, due to the large ES variance caused by clinical and methodological differences among the studies, we recommend that future studies follow strict standardization of data collection and analysis of FATmax and AerT-related outcomes

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Association and Differences between Aerobic Threshold and Point of Optimal Fat Oxidation

Over the past two decades, scientists have attempted to evaluate whether the point of maximal fat oxidation (FATmax) and the aerobic threshold (AerT) are connected. The existence of such a relationship would allow a more tailored training approach for athletes while improving the efficacy of individualized exercise prescriptions when treating numerous health-related issues. However, studies have reported conflicting results, and this issue remains unresolved. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed: (i) to examine the strength of the association between FATmax and AerT by using the effect size (ES) of correlation coefficient (r) and standardized mean difference (SMD); (ii) to identify potential moderators and their influence on ES variability. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021239351) and ClinicalTrials (NCT03789045). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched and fourteen articles, consisting of overall 35 ES for r and 26 ES for SMD were included. Obtained ESs were analyzed using a multilevel random-effects meta-analysis. Our results support the presence of a significant association between FATmax and AerT exercise intensities. In conclusion, due to the large ES variance caused by clinical and methodological differences among the studies, we recommend that future studies follow strict standardization of data collection and analysis of FATmax and AerT-related outcomes

DE-PASS best evidence statement (BESt): determinants of adolescents’ device-based physical activity and sedentary behaviour in settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Although physical activity (PA) is associated with significant health benefits, only a small percentage of adolescents meet recommended PA levels. This systematic review with meta-analysis explored the modifiable determinants of adolescents’ device-based PA and/or sedentary behaviour (SB), evaluated in previous interventions and examined the associations between PA/SB and these determinants in settings. Methods: A search was conducted on five electronic databases, including papers published from January 2010 to July 2023. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) or Controlled Trials (CTs) measuring adolescents’ device-based PA/SB and their modifiable determinants at least at two time points: pre- and post-intervention were considered eligible. PA/SB and determinants were the main outcomes. Modifiable determinants were classified after data extraction adopting the social-ecological perspective. Robust Bayesian meta-analyses (RoBMA) were performed per each study setting. Outcomes identified in only one study were presented narratively. The risk of bias for each study and the certainty of the evidence for each meta-analysis were evaluated. The publication bias was also checked. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021282874. Results: Fourteen RCTs (eight in school, three in school and family, and one in the family setting) and one CT (in the school setting) were included. Fifty-four modifiable determinants were identified and were combined into 33 broader determinants (21 individual–psychological, four individual–behavioural, seven interpersonal, and one institutional). RoBMAs revealed none or negligible pooled intervention effects on PA/SB or determinants in all settings. The certainty of the evidence of the impact of interventions on outcomes ranged from very low to low. Narratively, intervention effects in favour of the experimental group were detected in school setting for the determinants: knowledge of the environment for practicing PA, d = 1.84, 95%CI (1.48, 2.20), behaviour change techniques, d = 0.90, 95%CI (0.09, 1.70), choice provided, d = 0.70, 95%CI (0.36, 1.03), but no corresponding effects on PA or SB were found. Conclusions: Weak to minimal evidence regarding the associations between the identified modifiable determinants and adolescents’ device-based PA/SB in settings were found, probably due to intervention ineffectiveness. Well-designed and well-implemented multicomponent interventions should further explore the variety of modifiable determinants of adolescents’ PA/SB, including policy and environmental variables

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt):modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5–19 years–a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policy makers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis: A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane’s RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health’s tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination: No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance. Systematic review registration: CRD4202128287

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt): modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5–19 years–a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policymakers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5–19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane’s RoB V.2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health’s tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt): modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5-19 years-a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policymakers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane's RoB V.2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health's tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance. Systematic review registration CRD42021282874

Factors Determining the Agreement between Aerobic Threshold and Point of Maximal Fat Oxidation: Follow-Up on a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Association

: Regular exercise at the intensity matching maximal fat oxidation (FATmax) has been proposed as a key element in both athletes and clinical populations when aiming to enhance the body's ability to oxidize fat. In order to allow a more standardized and tailored training approach, the connection between FATmax and the individual aerobic thresholds (AerT) has been examined. Although recent findings strongly suggest that a relationship exists between these two intensities, correlation alone is not sufficient to confirm that the intensities necessarily coincide and that the error between the two measures is small. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to examine the agreement levels between the exercise intensities matching FATmax and AerT by pooling limits of agreement in a function of three parameters: (i) the average difference, (ii) the average within-study variation, and (iii) the variation in bias across studies, and to examine the influence of clinical and methodological inter- and intra-study differences on agreement levels. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021239351) and ClinicalTrials (NCT03789045). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for studies examining FATmax and AerT connection. Overall, 12 studies with forty-five effect sizes and a total of 774 subjects fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The ROBIS tool for risk of bias assessment was used to determine the quality of included studies. In conclusion, the overall 95% limits of agreement of the differences between FATmax and AerT exercise intensities were larger than the a priori determined acceptable agreement due to the large variance caused by clinical and methodological differences among the studies. Therefore, we recommend that future studies follow a strict standardization of data collection and analysis of FATmax- and AerT-related outcomes

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt) : modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5-19 years : a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policy makers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio