Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41496812›Full record

ArticleSports medicine and health science2025

Physiological basis for recommending changes to the physical activity guidelines.

James S Skinner, J Larry Durstine

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine and health science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

James S SkinnerProfessor Emeritus, Department of Kinesiology, Indiana University, USA.
J Larry DurstineDistinguished Professor Emeritus, Arnold School of Public Health, Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid drop in mortality risk as people become more active has been known for some time. While the public health message is clear (i.e., that any physical activity [PA] is better than no PA), no acceptable explanation as to why this rapid drop in mortality occurs is available. Without an explanation, providing specific answers as to what sedentary people should do to optimize health remains difficult. Research findings from studies on exercise physiology and inactivity physiology show why a lack of understanding of the importance of regular exercise or for becoming physically active exists. These findings also show how new knowledge can modify present PA guidelines. With sedentary people, being less inactive is more critical than becoming more active. Active people can also reduce their inactivity and achieve greater health benefits. Adults doing more vigorous aerobic and strength training achieve greater health benefits. No more than two days should elapse between exercise sessions 1) to improve insulin sensitivity and improve glucose tolerance, and 2) to activate muscle enzymes such as lipoprotein lipase to reduce postprandial lipemia. Older adults should do more strength exercises to minimize the effects of aging on sarcopenia. Subjective perception of effort is an easy, useful way to prescribe exercise. Being less inactive and more active are both important lifestyle considerations, and both must be promoted to all age groups.

Indexed as

Carbohydrate metabolismFat metabolismGuidelinesInactivityMuscle fiber typesVentilatory threshold

Identifiers

PMID41496812
PMCPMC12766283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.