Student Health, Physical Activity and Commute Mode and Distance

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Szlemko
PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. e0229012
Author(s):  
Abdul-Aziz Seidu ◽  
Bright Opoku Ahinkorah ◽  
Ebenezer Agbaglo ◽  
Eugene Kofuor Maafo Darteh ◽  
Edward Kwabena Ameyaw ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 287-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley J. Cardinal

Concerns about college and university student health date back to at least the mid-19th century. These concerns were addressed through the development and implementation of required, service-based physical activity education programs. In the 1920s–1930s, 97% of American colleges and universities offered such programs. Today less than 40% do. However, student health issues persist. This essay asserts that kinesiology departments are best suited to address these needs by delivering physical activity education courses through their institution’s general education curriculum. General education courses are those that every student must take in order to develop the competencies necessary for living a full and complete life and contributing to society. Given the growing costs of higher education, any such requirement must be justifiable. Therefore, implementing and sustaining a physical activity education general education requirement is not for the faint of heart; it requires effort, resources, support, and time. This essay explores these issues.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (92) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elvyra Grinienė ◽  
Gintarė Jankauskaitė

Research  background  and  hypothesis.  The  society  is  concerned  not  only  about  worsening  student  health, but also medically unexplainable psychosomatic complaints which can be the risk factor for various health and behavioural problems (WHO, 2006). Research aim was to determine the dependence of psychosomatic complaints experienced by 10–15-year-old students on their physical activity, age and gender. Research methods. With reference to the international questionnaire of student health and lifestyle (WHO, 2006), a questionnaire containing 31 questions was constructed for the research. Its answers about physical activity were coded from 1 – never to 5, 7, 8 – different variants of often. The questionnaire survey was conducted in February, 2012, in two schools of Kaunas city. The research participants were 293 V–VIII-grade 10–15-year-old students. The answers were analysed with reference to students’ physical activity, age and gender. Research  results.  Most  respondents  were  moderately  or  intensively  physically  active:  more  of  them  were younger (10–12 years) than older (13–15 years), and there were more boys than girls. The students often exercised and did sports individually. Health self-assessment as good or even perfect was demonstrated by most physically active students. During the last 6 months they more rarely felt various psychosomatic complaints, especially related to negative emotions. Students of low physical activity felt more various psychosomatic complaints. Conclusion. Physically more active students rarely experienced psychosomatic complaints, which show that physical activity is a significant factor reducing negative psychosomatic emotions.Keywords: schoolchildren’s physical activity, health self-assessment, psychosomatic complaints.


2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Bonell ◽  
F Jamal ◽  
A Harden ◽  
H Wells ◽  
W Parry ◽  
...  

BackgroundIn contrast to curriculum-based health education interventions in schools, the school environment approach promotes health by modifying schools' physical/social environment. This systematic review reports on the health effects of the school environment and processes by which these might occur. It includes theories, intervention outcome and process evaluations, quantitative studies and qualitative studies.Research questionsResearch question (RQ)1: What theories are used to inform school environment interventions or explain school-level health influences? What testable hypotheses are suggested? RQ2: What are the effects on student health/inequalities of school environment interventions addressing organisation/management; teaching/pastoral care/discipline; and the physical environment? What are the costs? RQ3: How feasible/acceptable and context dependent are such interventions? RQ4: What are the effects on student health/inequalities of school-level measures of organisation/management; teaching/pastoral care/discipline; and the physical environment? RQ5: Through what processes might such influences occur?Data sourcesA total of 16 databases were searched between 30 July 2010 and 23 September 2010 to identify relevant studies, including the British Educational Index, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Health Management Information Consortium, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. In addition, references of included studies were checked and authors contacted.Review methodsIn stage 1, we mapped references concerning how the school environment affects health and consulted stakeholders to identify stage 2 priorities. In stage 2, we undertook five reviews corresponding to our RQs.ResultsStage 1: A total of 82,775 references were retrieved and 1144 were descriptively mapped. Stage 2: A total of 24 theories were identified (RQ1). The human functioning and school organisation, social capital and social development theories were judged most useful. Ten outcome evaluations were included (RQ2). Four US randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and one UK quasi-experimental study examined interventions building school community/relationships. Studies reported benefits for some, but not all outcomes (e.g. aggression, conflict resolution, emotional health). Two US RCTs assessed interventions empowering students to contribute to modifying food/physical activity environments, reporting benefits for physical activity but not for diet. Three UK quasi-experimental evaluations examined playground improvements, reporting mixed findings, with benefits being greater for younger children and longer break times. Six process evaluations (RQ3) reported positively. One study suggested that implementation was facilitated when this built on existing ethos and when senior staff were supportive. We reviewed 42 multilevel studies, confining narrative synthesis to 10 that appropriately adjusted for confounders. Four UK/US reports suggested that schools with higher value-added attainment/attendance had lower rates of substance use and fighting. Three reports from different countries examined school policies on smoking/alcohol, with mixed results. One US study found that schools with more unobservable/unsupervised places reported increased substance use. Another US study reported that school size, age structure and staffing ratio did not correlate with student drinking. Twenty-one qualitative reports from different countries (RQ5) suggested that disengagement, lack of safety and lack of participation in decisions may predispose students to engage in health risks.LimitationsWe found no evidence regarding health inequalities or cost, and could not undertake meta-analysis.ConclusionsThere is non-definitive evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of school environment interventions involving community/relationship building, empowering student participation in modifying schools' food/physical activity environments, and playground improvements. Multilevel studies suggest that schools that add value educationally may promote student health. Qualitative studies suggest pathways underlying these effects. This evidence lends broad support to theories of social development, social capital and human functioning and school organisation. Further trials to examine the effects of school environment modifications on student health are recommended.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme.


JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 197 (11) ◽  
pp. 891-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. P. Novak

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document