| Literature DB >> 32326333 |
Una Britton1, Johann Issartel1, Jennifer Symonds2, Sarahjane Belton1.
Abstract
Physical activity (PA) decreases with age. The school transition is noted for significant changes in PA behaviour. Motor competence (MC), health-related fitness (HRF), and perceived competence (PC) are generally positively associated with PA. The aim of this study was to examine longitudinal cross-lagged relationships between PA, MC, HRF, and PC across the school transition from final year of primary school to first year of second-level school in Irish youth. PA (accelerometery), object-control and locomotor MC (TGMD-III), PC (perceived athletic competence subscale of the Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents), and HRF (20 m shuttle run, horizontal jump, vertical jump, push-ups, curl-ups) were measured in final year of primary school (6th class) and first year of second-level school (1st year). In the sixth class, 261 participants (53% female; mean age 12.22 ± 0.48 years) were tested. In first year, 291 participants (48% female; mean age: 13.20 ± 0.39 years) were tested. In total, 220 participants were involved in the study at both timepoints. Cross-lagged regression in AMOS23, using full information maximum likelihood estimation, was conducted to test reciprocal and predictive pathways between variables. The full cross-lagged model showed acceptable fit (χ2 = 69.12, df = 8, p < 0.01, NFI = 0.93, CFI = 0.94). HRF was the strongest predictor of future PA (β = 0.353), and also predicted PC (β = 0.336) and MC (β = 0.163). Object-control MC predicted future PA (β = 0.192). Reciprocal relationships existed between object-control MC and PA, and between object-control MC and PC. HRF was the strongest predictor of PA. Object-control MC also predicted PA. PA promotion strategies should target the development of HRF and object-control MC in primary school to reduce the decline in PA frequently observed after the school transition.Entities:
Keywords: health-related fitness; motor competence; perceived competence; physical activity; school transition; youth
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32326333 PMCID: PMC7215834 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082874
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Measurement of health-related fitness (HRF).
| HRF Component | Test | Source |
|---|---|---|
| CRE | 20 MST | FITNESSGRAM; EUROFIT |
| MS | HJ | EUROFIT; HELENA Study |
|
| VJ * | HELENA Study |
| ME | Push-ups | FITNESSGRAM |
| - | Curl-ups | FITNESSGRAM |
Note: CRE = cardiorespiratory endurance; MS = muscular strength; ME = muscular endurance; 20 MST = 20 metre shuttle run test; HJ = horizontal jump; VJ = vertical jump; FITNESSGRAM [55]. The HELENA Study [27]. * VJ was assessed using the Abalakov jump test protocol outlined in the HELENA study [27,57] and using a jump mat and belt [58] in place of an infrared jump platform.
Fit indices for latent variables in 6th class.
| Variable | χ2 | Df | CFI | RMSEA | LCI | UCI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PAC | 5.56 | 5 | 0.352 | 0.990 | 0.040 | 0.020 | 0.070 |
| Object-Control * | 1.1 | 2 | 0.576 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.090 |
| Locomotor | 2.65 | 2 | 0.266 | 0.980 | 0.031 | 0.000 | 0.117 |
| HRF | 14.26 | 3 | 0.003 | 0.960 | 0.106 | 0.055 | 0.164 |
Note: * catch removed due to low loading. χ2 = Chi-square; Df = degrees of freedom; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; LCI = lower confidence interval; UCI = upper confidence interval; PAC = perceived athletic competence; HRF = health-related fitness.
Measurement invariance for latent variables.
| Variable | χ2 | Df | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PAC | 6.33 | 4 | 0.176 |
| Object-Control * | 7.33 | 3 | 0.062 |
| Locomotor | 5.291 | 3 | 0.152 |
| HRF | 7.786 | 4 | 0.100 |
Note: * catch removed due to low loading; χ2 = Chi-square; Df = degrees of freedom; PAC = perceived athletic competence; HRF = health-related fitness.
Descriptive statistics for measured variables.
| Male | Female |
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Testing Period |
| Mean |
| Mean | |||
| 6th class MVPA (mins) | 58 | 59.27 ± 24.55 | 77 | 48.50 ± 16.82 | 2.87 | 0.005 | 0.52 |
| 1st year MVPA (mins) | 44 | 44.95 ± 18.83 | 59 | 35.11 ± 12.12 | 3.04 | 0.003 | 0.64 |
| 6th class HRF | 128 | 1.32 ± 3.71 | 133 | −1.27 ± 3.08 | 6.12 | <0.001 | 0.76 |
| 1st year HRF | 155 | 1.41 ± 3.43 | 143 | −1.51 ± 2.65 | 8.22 | <0.001 | 0.95 |
| 6th class PAC | 122 | 2.92 ± 0.67 | 125 | 2.75 ± 0.73 | 1.94 | 0.053 | 0.24 |
| 1st year PAC | 135 | 2.92 ± 0.70 | 119 | 2.58 ± 0.79 | 3.6 | <0.001 | 0.46 |
| 6th class object-control MC | 120 | 27.91 ± 4.01 | 118 | 23.12 ± 5.55 | 7.62 | <0.001 | 0.99 |
| 1st year object-control MC | 77 | 28.88 ± 3.51 | 62 | 24.90 ± 5.08 | 6.57 | <0.001 | 0.92 |
| 6th class locomotor MC | 119 | 29.29 ± 3.85 | 119 | 29.02 ± 3.64 | 0.55 | 0.580 | 0.07 |
| 1st year locomotor MC | 99 | 30.78 ± 3.21 | 86 | 24.90 ± 5.08 | 2.46 | 0.015 | 1.40 |
Note:ap-value for sex differences; b Cohen’s d effect size; MVPA = moderate-vigorous physical activity; HRF = health-related fitness; PAC = perceived athletic competence; MC = motor competence.
Figure 1Autoregressive and cross-lagged pathways between variables in 6th class (T1) and 1st year (T2). Note: * Standardised regression coefficients significant at p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Dashed line = non-significant pathway.
Pathways by sex.
| Males | Females | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pathway | β |
| β |
|
| T1 MVPA–T2 MVPA | 0.590 | *** | 0.019 | NS |
| T1 Object-Control–T2 Object-Control | 0.298 | ** | 0.654 | *** |
| T1 MVPA–T2 Object-Control | 0.144 | NS | −0.329 | ** |
| T1 MVPA–T2 Locomotor | −0.004 | NS | −0.358 | ** |
Note: β = standardised regression coefficient; * significant at p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; NS = non-significant; T1 = 6th class; T2 = 1st year, MVPA = moderate-vigorous physical activity.
Figure 2Pathways between variables from 6th class (T1) to 1st year (T2) that were statistically significantly different between males and females. Only significantly different pathways are shown. All other pathways were not statistically different by sex. Note: * Standardised regression coefficients significant at p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. Grey line = female pathway; black line = male pathway. Dashed line = non-significant pathway. Regression coefficients shown in italics = male values.