4.6 Review

Physical literacy assessment in adults: A systematic review

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288541

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physical literacy is a multidimensional concept encompassing motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge, and understanding for lifelong engagement in physical activity. This systematic review analyzed 31 studies published from 2016 to 2022 to identify and evaluate various instruments used to assess physical literacy in adults. The review found a lack of standardized measurement methods and insufficient reporting on measurement quality and usability characteristics, making it challenging to compare and draw robust conclusions. The existing assessments may not be appropriate for large-scale or epidemiological studies.
Physical literacy is a multidimensional construct that has been defined and interpreted in various ways, one of the most common being the motivation, confidence, physical competence, knowledge and understanding to maintain physical activity throughout the life course. Although its improvement can positively affect many behavioral, psychological, social, and physical variables, debate remains over an appropriate method of collecting empirical physical literacy data. This systematic review sought to identify and critically evaluate all primary studies (published and unpublished, regardless of design or language) that assessed physical literacy in adults or have proposed measurement criteria. Relevant studies were identified by searching four databases (Pubmed, SportDiscus, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science), scanning reference lists of included articles, and manual cross-referencing of bibliographies cited in prior reviews. The final search was concluded on July 15, 2022. Thirty-one studies, published from 2016 to 2022, were analyzed. We found seven instruments measuring physical literacy in adults, of which six were questionnaires. The Perceived Physical Literacy Instrument was the first developed for adults and the most adopted. The included studies approached physical literacy definition in two ways: by pre-defining domains and assessing them discretely (through pre-validated or self-constructed instruments) and by defining domains as sub-scales after factorial analyses. We found a fair use of objective and subjective measures to assess different domains. The wide use of instruments developed for other purposes in combined assessments suggests the need for further instrument development and the potential oversimplification of the holistic concept, which may not result in a better understanding of physical literacy. Quality and usability characteristics of measurements were generally insufficiently reported. This lack of data makes it impossible to compare and make robust conclusions. We could not identify if any of the existing physical literacy assessments for adults is appropriate for large-scale/epidemiological studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据