ArticleBMC public health2025
O the places rural children will go…to get physical activity: a cross sectional analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighborhood environment associations with children's active transportation and location-specific physical activity in small town and rural Midwestern settings.Journal of transport & health · 2026Article
- Not all screens are equal: associations between screen-based sedentary behavior and physical activity in Chinese children and adolescents.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeYouth living in rural areas have higher risk for overweight/obesity. It is important to understand where these children engage in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary time to encourage or intervene on activity in specific locations. This study compared MVPA and sedentary time across locations among children with overweight/obesity in the rural Midwest of the U.S.
methodsParticipants wore an accelerometer and Global Positioning System tracker over 7-days to collect data on MVPA, sedentary time, and location. Locations were categorized as Home, Home Neighborhood, School, School Neighborhood, and 'Other'. Differences based on school and non-school days were examined.
resultsParticipants (n = 44; 8.8 ± 0.8 years; 61.4% females) engaged in an average of 41.4 min of MVPA/day and 6.7 h of sedentary time/day. In total, most MVPA was obtained at School (18.2 min/day, 44.2% of total MVPA), followed by Other (22.7%) and Home (20.5%). Participants accrued most of their sedentary time at School (141.7 min/day, 35.3%) followed by Home (31.2%) and Other locations (20.3%). Relative to time spent in location, participants were least active in their School Neighborhood (3.7% of time was in MVPA) and most active in Other locations (7.0%). When comparing non-school and school days, participants obtained 95.7 more minutes sedentary time at Home and were in Other locations for almost 2.5 more hours more on non-school days than school days. During school days, participants obtained 25.0 min/day of MVPA at school.
conclusionThe School location is supportive of MVPA and high amounts of sedentary time. In addition to supporting children to travel to locations where they are likely to be active, efforts are needed to increase activity in locations where children spend substantial time. Providing more opportunities for activity in/around the home and reducing sedentary time during school may be promising targets for improving health among rural children.
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.