ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2025
Psychosocial well-being in middle schoolers: effects of a school cycling program in the wake of COVID-19.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Developing evidence-informed pathways for long-term engagement in cycling for the United States.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The impact of the Riding for Focus (R4F) school-based cycling program and key risk factors on middle school students' mental health was evaluated following COVID-19 lockdowns. Adolescents face growing mental health challenges that the R4F program aims to address by promoting physical activity and well-being. Methods: The study surveyed students from 31 U.S. schools, assessing mental health via the WHO-5 Well-Being Index and PSC-17-Y checklist. Non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA with Dunn's test) and effect size calculations (Cohen's d) were used; clinical risk assessments employed Fisher's Exact Test and Koopman scores with established cutoff values. Modifiable risk factors analyzed included physical activity, sleep, screen time, and breakfast habits. Linear regression evaluated dose-response relationships between these factors and wellness scores. Results: Participation in R4F was linked to a modest 5% boost in WHO-5 well-being scores; however, PSC-17-Y scores also increased slightly, contrary to previous findings, indicating more reported symptoms. Differences in outcomes were seen across gender and race/ethnicity. Notably, modifiable risk factors such as sleep, screen time, and physical activity showed clear dose-response relationships with mental health metrics. Discussion: Results suggest the R4F program may support adolescent mental health, though outcomes vary by demographic and lifestyle factors, highlighting a need for targeted, individualized interventions in youth populations.
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.