ArticlePloS one2021
The association between student body mass index and tests of flexibility assessed by the FITNESSGRAM®: New York City public school students, 2017-18.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Annual School Fitness Reports on Students' Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial of Parental Reporting.Pediatric exercise science · 2026Article
- Trends in 4th-12th grade students' aerobic capacity and muscular strength and endurance: New York City public school students, 2006-2019.Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
- The relationship between BMI and physical fitness among 7451 college freshmen: a cross-sectional study in Beijing, China.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- Feasibility and Reliability of Health-Related Physical Fitness Tests in Children and Adolescents with Hearing Impairment.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
FITNESSGRAM® is the most widely used criterion-referenced tool to assess/report on student health-related fitness across the US. Potential weight-related biases with the two most common tests of musculoskeletal fitness-the trunk extension and Back-Saver Sit-and-Reach (sit-and-reach)-have been hypothesized, though have not been studied. To determine the association between musculoskeletal fitness test performance and weight status, we use data from 571,133 New York City public school 4th-12th grade students (85% non-White; 75% qualified for free or reduced-price meals) with valid/complete 2017-18 FITNESSGRAM® data. Adjusted logistic mixed effects models with a random effect for school examined the association between weight status and whether a student was in the Healthy Fitness Zone (HFZ; met sex- and age-specific criterion-referenced standards) for the trunk extension and sit-and-reach. Compared to students with normal weight, the odds of being in the HFZ for trunk extension were lower for students with underweight (OR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.741, 0.795) and higher for students with overweight (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.081, 1.122) and obesity (OR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.090, 1.13). The odds of being in the HFZ for sit-and-reach were lower for students with underweight OR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.826, 0.878), overweight (OR = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.819, 0.844) and obesity (OR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.641, 0.661). Students with overweight and obesity perform better on the trunk extension, yet worse on the sit-and-reach, compared to students with normal weight. Teachers, administrators, and researchers should be aware of the relationship of BMI with student performance in these assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.