As the two prime examples of sport light, running and walking have become very popular sports activities in the past decades. There are references in the literature of similarities between both sports, however these parallels have never been studied. In addition, the current digitalisation of society can have important influences on the further diversification of profiles. Data of a large-scale population survey among runners and walkers (n = 4913) in Flanders (Belgium) were used to study their sociodemographic, sports related and attitudinal characteristics, and wearable usage. The results showed that walkers are more often female, older, lower educated, and less often use wearables. To predict wearable usage, sports-related and attitudinal characteristics are important among runners but not among walkers. Motivational variables to use wearables are important to predict wearable usage among both runners and walkers. Additionally, whether or not the runner or walker registers the heart rate is the most important predictor. The present study highlights similarities and differences between runners and walkers. By adding attitudinal characteristics and including walkers this article provides new insights to the literature, which can be used by policymakers and professionals in the field of sport, exercise and health, and technology developers to shape their services accordingly.
All over the world, sport events are seen as significant tools for creating positive social impact. This is understandable, as sport events have the power to attract enthusiastic participants, volunteers and to reach large audiences of visitors and followers via (social) media. Outbursts of excitement, pleasure and feelings of camaraderie are experienced among millions of people in the case of mega events. Still, a fairly large section of the population does not care that much for sports. Some may experience road blocks, litter and noise disturbance from the events. Sport events generally require investments, often from local or national authorities. Concerned citizens rightfully point at alternative usage of public money (e.g. schools, health care). Thrills and excitement are good things, but does that warrant public money being spent on? Or is there a broader social significance of sport events? Can sport events help alleviate societal issues (like cohesion, inequality and non-participation), do they generate a social impact beyond what spectators experience during the event? In this report the authors have aimed to describe the state of play as regards the evidence for the occurrence of a social impact from sport events and the strategies that are required to enhance social impact from sport events. For the report, an extensive scan of the literature was performed and input was collected from a key group of international experts.
Objective: To investigate the effects of a school-based once-a-week sports program on physical fitness, physical activity, and cardiometabolic health in children and adolescents with a physical disability. Methods: This controlled clinical trial included 71 children and adolescents from four schools for special education [mean age 13.7 (2.9) years, range 8–19, 55% boys]. Participants had various chronic health conditions including cerebral palsy (37%), other neuromuscular (44%), metabolic (8%), musculoskeletal (7%), and cardiovascular (4%) disorders. Before recruitment and based on the presence of school-based sports, schools were assigned as sport or control group. School-based sports were initiated and provided by motivated experienced physical educators. The sport group (n = 31) participated in a once-a-week school-based sports program for 6 months, which included team sports. The control group (n = 40) followed the regular curriculum. Anaerobic performance was assessed by the Muscle Power Sprint Test. Secondary outcome measures included aerobic performance, VO2 peak, strength, physical activity, blood pressure, arterial stiffness, body composition, and the metabolic profile. Results: A significant improvement of 16% in favor of the sport group was found for anaerobic performance (p = 0.003). In addition, the sport group lost 2.8% more fat mass compared to the control group (p = 0.007). No changes were found for aerobic performance, VO2 peak, physical activity, blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and the metabolic profile. Conclusion: Anaerobic performance and fat mass improved following a school-based sports program. These effects are promising for long-term fitness and health promotion, because sports sessions at school eliminate certain barriers for sports participation and adding a once-a-week sports session showed already positive effects for 6 months.
