Journal•ISSN: 0306-3674
British Journal of Sports Medicine
BMJ
About: British Journal of Sports Medicine is an academic journal published by BMJ. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Poison control & Injury prevention. It has an ISSN identifier of 0306-3674. Over the lifetime, 9399 publications have been published receiving 438573 citations. The journal is also known as: BJSM & BJSM,.
Topics: Poison control, Injury prevention, Athletes, Population, Medicine
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
University of Coimbra1, University of Southern Queensland2, National Institute for Health and Welfare3, Arizona State University4, Ghent University5, Institute of Technology, Tralee6, University of Ottawa7, Glasgow Caledonian University8, Oregon Health & Science University9, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust10, George Washington University11, Norwegian Institute of Public Health12, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences13, University of Sydney14, Alberta Health Services15, Queen's University Belfast16, University of Bristol17, Pennington Biomedical Research Center18, University of Cape Town19, University of Regensburg20, University of East Anglia21, University of Granada22, University of Colombo23, National Institutes of Health24, World Health Organization25
TL;DR: New WHO 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour reaffirm messages that some physical activity is better than none, that more physical Activity is better for optimal health outcomes and provide a new recommendation on reducing sedentary behaviours.
Abstract: Objectives To describe new WHO 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Methods The guidelines were developed in accordance with WHO protocols. An expert Guideline Development Group reviewed evidence to assess associations between physical activity and sedentary behaviour for an agreed set of health outcomes and population groups. The assessment used and systematically updated recent relevant systematic reviews; new primary reviews addressed additional health outcomes or subpopulations. Results The new guidelines address children, adolescents, adults, older adults and include new specific recommendations for pregnant and postpartum women and people living with chronic conditions or disability. All adults should undertake 150-300 min of moderate-intensity, or 75-150 min of vigorous-intensity physical activity, or some equivalent combination of moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity, per week. Among children and adolescents, an average of 60 min/day of moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity across the week provides health benefits. The guidelines recommend regular muscle-strengthening activity for all age groups. Additionally, reducing sedentary behaviours is recommended across all age groups and abilities, although evidence was insufficient to quantify a sedentary behaviour threshold. Conclusion These 2020 WHO guidelines update previous WHO recommendations released in 2010. They reaffirm messages that some physical activity is better than none, that more physical activity is better for optimal health outcomes and provide a new recommendation on reducing sedentary behaviours. These guidelines highlight the importance of regularly undertaking both aerobic and muscle strengthening activities and for the first time, there are specific recommendations for specific populations including for pregnant and postpartum women and people living with chronic conditions or disability. These guidelines should be used to inform national health policies aligned with the WHO Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018-2030 and to strengthen surveillance systems that track progress towards national and global targets.
3,218 citations
Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health1, University of Calgary2, NorthShore University HealthSystem3, University of Michigan4, Boston University5, University of Missouri–Kansas City6, University of Maryland, Baltimore7, University of Washington8, Oslo University Hospital9, University of Zurich10, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill11, Harvard University12, University of Toronto13, University at Buffalo14, University of Melbourne15, University of California, San Francisco16, Medical College of Wisconsin17, Boston Children's Hospital18, Princeton University19, Vanderbilt University20, Vanderbilt University Medical Center21, Toronto Western Hospital22
TL;DR: This document is developed for physicians and healthcare providers who are involved in athlete care, whether at a recreational, elite or professional level, and provides an overview of issues that may be of importance to healthcare providers involved in the management of SRC.
Abstract: The 2017 Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous statements1–4 and to develop further conceptual understanding of sport-related concussion (SRC) using an expert consensus-based approach. This document is developed for physicians and healthcare providers who are involved in athlete care, whether at a recreational, elite or professional level. While agreement exists on the principal messages conveyed by this document, the authors acknowledge that the science of SRC is evolving and therefore individual management and return-to-play decisions remain in the realm of clinical judgement.
This consensus document reflects the current state of knowledge and will need to be modified as new knowledge develops. It provides an overview of issues that may be of importance to healthcare providers involved in the management of SRC. This paper should be read in conjunction with the systematic reviews and methodology paper that accompany it. First and foremost, this document is intended to guide clinical practice; however, the authors feel that it can also help form the agenda for future research relevant to SRC by identifying knowledge gaps.
A series of specific clinical questions were developed as part of the consensus process for the Berlin 2016 meeting. Each consensus question was the subject of a specific formal systematic review, which is published concurrently with this summary statement. Readers are directed to these background papers in conjunction with this summary statement as they provide the context for the issues and include the scope of published research, search strategy and citations reviewed for each question. This 2017 consensus statement also summarises each topic and recommendations in the context of all five CISG meetings (that is, 2001, 2004, 2008, 2012 as well as 2016). Approximately 60 000 published articles were screened by the expert panels for the Berlin …
2,388 citations
Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health1, University of Calgary2, Boston University3, University of Missouri–Kansas City4, International Olympic Committee5, University of Michigan6, Veterans Health Administration7, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill8, University of British Columbia9, Medical College of Wisconsin10, University of Melbourne11, McMaster University12, Rutgers University13
TL;DR: This paper is a revision and update of the recommendations developed following the 1st (Vienna 2001), 2nd (Prague 2004) and 3rd (Zurich 2008) International Consensus Conferences on Concussions in Sport and is based on the deliberations at the 4th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich, November 2012.
Abstract: The new 2012 Zurich Consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous documents and to develop further conceptual understanding of this problem using a formal consensus-based approach. A detailed description of the consensus process is outlined at the end of this document under the Background section. This document is developed primarily for use by physicians and healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of injured athletes, whether at the recreational, elite or professional level.
2,269 citations
TL;DR: Assessment of reviews investigating physical activity and depression, anxiety, self-esteem and cognitive functioning in children and adolescents and the association between sedentary behaviour and mental health by performing a brief review shows small but consistent associations betweensedentary screen time and poorer mental health.
Abstract: Objective To synthesise reviews investigating physical activity and depression, anxiety, self-esteem and cognitive functioning in children and adolescents and to assess the association between sedentary behaviour and mental health by performing a brief review. Methods Searches were performed in 2010. Inclusion criteria specifi ed review articles reporting chronic physical activity and at least one mental health outcome that included depression, anxiety/stress, self-esteem and cognitive functioning in children or adolescents. Results Four review articles reported evidence concerning depression, four for anxiety, three for self-esteem and seven for cognitive functioning. Nine primary studies assessed associations between sedentary behaviour and mental health. Physical activity has potentially benefi cial effects for reduced depression, but the evidence base is limited. Intervention designs are low in quality, and many reviews include cross-sectional studies. Physical activity interventions have been shown to have a small benefi cial effect for reduced anxiety, but the evidence base is limited. Physical activity can lead to improvements in self-esteem, at least in the short term. However, there is a paucity of good quality research. Reviews on physical activity and cognitive functioning have provided evidence that routine physical activity can be associated with improved cognitive performance and academic achievement, but these associations are usually small and inconsistent. Primary studies showed consistent negative associations between mental health and sedentary behaviour. Conclusions Association between physical activity and mental health in young people is evident, but research designs are often weak and effects are small to moderate. Evidence shows small but consistent associations between sedentary screen time and poorer mental health.
1,650 citations
TL;DR: Despite extensive use over 40 years, physical activity questionnaires still show limited reliability and validity and attempts at detailed interpretation in terms of exercise dosage and the extent of resulting health benefits seem premature.
Abstract: Despite extensive use over 40 years, physical activity questionnaires still show limited reliability and validity. Measurements have value in indicating conditions where an increase in physical activity would be beneficial and in monitoring changes in population activity. However, attempts at detailed interpretation in terms of exercise dosage and the extent of resulting health benefits seem premature. Such usage may become possible through the development of standardised instruments that will record the low intensity activities typical of sedentary societies, and will ascribe consistent biological meaning to terms such as light, moderate, and heavy exercise.
1,636 citations