ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Associations between perceived physical literacy and physical fitness tests among the adult population.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. 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.
- Does Aerobic Capacity Protect Against Stress? Insights From Two Stress-Induction Paradigms.Psychophysiology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The multidimensional concept of physical literacy (PL) is increasingly recognized as a holistic framework supporting lifelong physical activity. Although research is growing, empirical evidence remains limited and focused mainly on children and adolescents. In adults the relationship between subjectively measured (perceived) PL and objectively measured physical fitness tests is still unclear. The aim of this study was therefore to examine associations between overall and domain-specific perceived PL and multiple components of physical fitness in an adult population. Methods: An exploratory cross-sectional study was conducted with 180 adults (60% women; mean age 40.71 ± 15.79 years), recruited during community-based physical activity education events in rural Austria. Perceived PL was assessed using the Perceived Physical Literacy Questionnaire (PPLQ), which captures six domains: motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge, understanding, and physical activity behavior. Physical fitness was evaluated through a series of field-based tests assessing cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength, flexibility of the upper and lower extremities, balance, and reaction time. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for the total sample and subsamples stratified by gender and age (<45/ ≥ 45 years). In line with the exploratory nature of the study, interpretation focused exclusively on effect sizes following Cohen's conventions. Results: Across all fitness parameters, the strongest correlations emerged for overall PL and the physical competence domain, followed by the physical activity behavior and confidence domains. In turn, the weakest correlations were observed for the motivation, knowledge, and understanding domains. Overall, correlations ranged predominantly from small-to-moderate, with notable variation across gender- and age-specific subgroups; in men and younger adults, correlations were generally stronger. Conclusion: This study provides new insights into the relationship between overall/domain-specific perceived PL and physical fitness tests in the adult population, particularly regarding less commonly explored fitness parameters such as upper extremity flexibility, reaction time, and balance. Given the exploratory nature of the study, future research with larger, more diverse, and probability-based samples is needed to strengthen both the internal and external validity of these findings.
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.