Skip to main content
BMJ - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to BMJ - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2021 Dec 2;11(12):e053817. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053817

Prospective changes in physical activity, sedentary time and sleep during the COVID-19 pandemic in a US-based cohort study

Erika Rees-Punia 1,, Christina C Newton 1, Melissa H Rittase 1, Rebecca A Hodge 1, Jannie Nielsen 2,3, Solveig Cunningham 2, Lauren R Teras 1, Alpa Patel 1
PMCID: PMC8640200  PMID: 34857575

Abstract

Objectives

Assess differences in movement behaviours within the 24-hour cycle, including light intensity physical activity (LPA), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), sedentary time and sleep, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess these differences stratified by several relevant factors in a subcohort of the Cancer Prevention Study-3.

Design and setting

US-based longitudinal cohort study (2018–August 2020).

Participants

N=1992 participants, of which 1304 (65.5%) are women, and 1512 (75.9%) are non-Latino white, with a mean age 57.0 (9.8) years.

Measures

Age, sex, race/ethnicity, education; self-reported LPA, MVPA, sedentary time and sleep duration collected before and during the pandemic; pandemic-related changes in work, childcare and living arrangement; COVID-19 health history.

Results

Compared to 2018, participants spent an additional 104 min/day sedentary, 61 fewer min/day in LPA and 43 fewer min/day in MVPA during the pandemic. Time spent sleeping was similar at the two time points. Differences in movement behaviours were more pronounced among men, those with a higher level of education, and those who were more active before the pandemic.

Conclusions

From 2018 to Summer 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, US adults have made significant shifts in daily time spent in LPA, MVPA and sedentary. There is an urgent need to promote more physical activity and less sedentary time during this public health crisis to avoid sustaining these patterns long-term.

Keywords: COVID-19, sleep medicine, preventive medicine, public health


Strengths and limitations of this study.

  • Using a prospective, 24-hour paradigm that integrates physical activity, sedentary time and sleep, this study adds to the largely cross-sectional literature investigating the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on daily behaviours.

  • This study further investigates differences between subgroups whose activities may have been differently affected by the pandemic, such as men compared with women, or participants who shifted to remote work compared with those who did not.

  • Reliance on self-reported data is a limitation of the current study, although physical activity, sedentary and sleep time survey data were correlated with accelerometry and diary data in previous validation studies.

  • The participants in the subcohort were predominately college educated and more physically active before the pandemic than the US population, and thus are not nationally representative.

Introduction

To halt the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a range of mitigation efforts were implemented, such as prohibiting large gatherings, reducing of face-to-face contact and limiting indoor activities with others. Many workplaces, schools, daycares, restaurants, gyms/fitness centres and other businesses closed, shifted online or drastically altered operations.1 While these preventative measures aimed to decrease the spread of COVID-19, these efforts may have inadvertently affected daily movement behaviours within the 24-hour cycle, including different intensities of physical activity (PA), sedentary time and sleep,2–4 all of which are widely recognised as important risk factors for cardiovascular disease, cancer and premature mortality.5–9

Studies report decreases in moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA (MVPA) during the COVID-19 pandemic among adults in Canada,10 China,11 France,12 Jordan,13 Scotland,14 Spain,15 Switzerland,16 the UK17 18 and the USA.19 However, all but a few of these studies11 12 18 have been cross-sectional, relying on retrospective reports of activity levels before the pandemic, an approach risking recall bias. Additionally, few studies have investigated pandemic-related changes in sedentary time, a behaviour distinct from inactivity that includes any waking behaviour characterised by a low energy expenditure while sitting or reclining.20 There are, however, a few studies that suggest that screen time13 and total sedentary time16 have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Unlike MVPA and sedentary time, results from studies of the association between COVID-19 and changes in sleep, however, are more heterogeneous. Some suggest that the pandemic is associated with an increase in sleep time,21–24 but a decrease in sleep quality.25 26 The effect of the pandemic on sleep time may vary with pre-pandemic sleep patterns and mental health status.27 28

Although research on PA behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic has been identified as an urgent public health issue,29 there remains a need for longitudinal data (including data collected before the pandemic began to minimise recall bias) that simultaneously considers time spent in all the co-dependent daily movement behaviours: PA, sedentary time and sleep. Previous studies investigated one aspect of movement at a time (eg, just MVPA), but no longitudinal study has investigated the impact of the pandemic on these movement behaviours simultaneously; therefore, it is unclear which activities are replacing those that have decreased during the pandemic (eg, if the noted decreases in MVPA have been replaced with lighter intensity activities (LPA), sedentary time or sleep). This information is important for understanding the potential consequences of pandemic-related changes in activity and for crafting effective public health messaging and intervention design. Thus, the aims of this study were: first, to assess the differences in 24-hour movement behaviours (MVPA, LPA, sedentary time and sleep) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and, second, to assess these differences stratified by several relevant factors (including age group, sex, history of COVID-19 infection, education, household income, living arrangement, pre-pandemic levels of MVPA and pandemic-related changes in work status and childcare, and body mass index) in a subcohort of the Cancer Prevention Study-3 (CPS-3) with prospective data collected before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Study population and design

The CPS-3 is a prospective study of cancer incidence and mortality initiated by the American Cancer Society in 2006.30 Over 303 000 participants aged 30–65 years with no history of cancer (except for basal or squamous cell skin cancer) were enrolled across the USA at various community locations between 2006 and 2013. CPS-3 participants completed a detailed lifestyle and medical history survey at enrolment and have completed additional surveys every 3 years beginning in 2015.

In June 2020, an online participant portal was developed and tested in a subgroup of CPS-3 participants. To achieve the desired goal of registering 3000 CPS-3 participants for the portal testing, 13 052 participants who completed the most recent (2018) CPS-3 survey were sent an email invitation to join, and the first 3000 participants to respond were granted access to register for the portal. Among those who registered (n=2979), 2429 participants completed a COVID-19-focused questionnaire (referred to as the COVID-19 survey; 81.5% survey response rate), which sought to determine how the pandemic has affected participants’ movement behaviours, physical and mental health, diet, healthcare access, health insurance, employment status and financial security. During this time (July and August of 2020), most cities and/or states across the USA had restrictions on indoor activities (including limited indoor dining and temporary closures of fitness centres and theatres), limitations on the number of people attending public gatherings and mask mandates; unlike other parts of the world, the USA did not experience any night-time curfews or nationwide lockdowns.

Participants were excluded from the analysis for missing or incomplete data on any of the movement behaviours from the 2018 (n=397) or the COVID-19 surveys (n=40). This left a total of 1992 participants in the current study.

Patient and public involvement

There was no patient involvement in this study.

Measures

Participants completed a validated 24-hour movement behaviours survey on both the 2018 and COVID-19 questionnaires.31–33 For the 2018 survey, participants were asked, ‘During the past year, estimate the hours per day you spent on typical weekdays and weekends in each of the following activities. Please average your seasonal physical activities over the entire year. Account for all 24 hours per day’. On the COVID-19 survey, participants were asked the same question with a modified recall period: ‘Since the COVID-19 pandemic started…’. Both surveys included, ‘sitting or lying down while watching TV’ and ‘other sitting (at work, at computer, while driving, eating, etc)’, which were used to capture total sedentary time; ‘standing or moving about’, ‘walking less than 3 mph or slower than 20 min per mile’ and ‘light activities’ to capture total LPA; ‘walking 3 or more mph or faster than 20 min per mile’, ‘moderate activities’ and ‘strenuous activities’ to capture total MVPA; ‘weight training’ and ‘other resistance exercises’ to capture total strength training; and ‘sleep’ to capture sleep duration. Item responses were all ‘0, <1, 1–2, 3–4, 5–6, 7–8, 9–10, 11+ hours per day’ and the mean number of hours within the response categories (ie, 0, 0.5, 1.5, 3.5, 5.5, 7.5, 9.5, 11 hours per day) were summed to obtain daily average time in each movement behaviour category.

Demographic information, including sex, race/ethnicity (from the baseline questionnaire), household income (2018) and highest level of formal educational attainment (baseline) was collected from previous CPS-3 questionnaires. On the COVID-19 survey, participants were asked about pandemic-related shifts to working from home, furloughs or job losses, living arrangements, personal COVID-19 history, caregiving responsibilities and childcare disruption.

Statistical analysis

We used a compositional framework to assess movement behaviour changes during the pandemic.2–4 The compositional framework highlights that PA, sedentary time and sleep are mutually exclusive yet interrelated activities that comprise the entire 24-hour day, and therefore, time spent in each one of these behaviours is dependent on time spent in the others.2–4 By using this framework, this study simultaneously considers the full 24-hour cycle, including time spent in all movement behaviours.

Average daily LPA, MVPA, strength training, sedentary and sleep time were treated as co-dependent, compositional variables for all analyses. To accomplish this, movement behaviours were first transformed to represent ratios of parts using an isometric log-ratio (ilr) coordinate system.34 After ilr transformations are applied, the data can then be analysed using any standard statistical technique that is valid under the assumptions applying to data in real space.2 3

The daily composition of time spent in LPA, MVPA, strength training, sedentary and sleeping in 2018 and during COVID-19 (July–August 2020) was described by the geometric mean of time spent in each respective movement behaviour, linearly adjusted so that total daily time spent in movement behaviours summed up to 1440 min/day (or 24 hours/day). All movement behaviours are expressed in figures as the proportion of the day spent on each movement behaviour. A Wald χ2 analysis of variance type II test was used to determine if the composition of movement behaviours was significantly different during the COVID-19 pandemic compared with 2018.

Additionally, models were stratified by sex, age group (<50, 50–<60, 60–<70, ≥70 years), living arrangement (alone, with others), pre-pandemic activity levels (meet, do not meet US aerobic PA guidelines (150 min/week moderate intensity PA or 75 min/week vigorous intensity PA, or some equivalent combination of the two intensities) in 2018),35 self-reported COVID-19 history (had, did not have COVID-19), highest level of educational attainment (less than 4-year college degree, college degree or more), pre-pandemic household income (<US$100 000, ≥US$100 000), pandemic-related changes in childcare (disruptions in childcare, not a child caregiver, no change in child care), change in work status (worked remotely, laid off/furloughed, both furloughed and worked remotely and no change) and body mass index (BMI; normal, overweight/obese). Multivariate analysis of covariance models were used to determine the significance of strata group by time (2018 vs during COVID-19) interactions.

Models were adjusted for (1) age and sex, and (2) age, sex, living arrangement (alone, with others), caregiving status (caregiver to adults or children, not a caregiver), employment status (full-time/part-time, retired, other), highest level of educational attainment (less than 4-year college degree, college degree or more), self-reported COVID-19 history (had, did not have COVID-19), pandemic-related changes in childcare (disruptions in childcare, not a child caregiver, no change in childcare) and change in work status (worked remotely, laid off/furloughed, both furloughed and worked remotely and no change). As model results (ie, F test statistics, model p values and time interaction p values) were very similar, results from the most parsimonious models are presented and results from fully adjusted models are included in the supplemental materials. All analyses were conducted in R (V.4.0.2) using the ‘Compositions’ package.36

Results

Participants (n=1992, mean age 57.0 (SD: 9.8 years), 65.5% women) were predominantly non-Latino white (75.9%) and highly educated (78.0% with a college degree; table 1). Approximately half (52.5%) of participants met US aerobic PA guidelines prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (2018). Among the participants who met guidelines in 2018, only 43.3% remained active (ie, continued to meet guidelines) during the pandemic (online supplemental table 1). Both before and during the pandemic, approximately 36% of participants’ MVPA time was comprised of brisk walking (3 or more mph or faster than 20 min per mile; online supplemental table 2).

Table 1.

Descriptive characteristics of the CPS-3 subcohort, n=1992

N (%)
Sex
Women 1304 (65.5)
Men 688 (34.5)
Age group
<50 years 498 (25.0)
50–<60 years 609 (30.6)
60–<70 years 706 (35.4)
>70 years 179 (9.0)
BMI group
Normal weight 821 (41.2)
Overweight 632 (31.7)
Obese 539 (27.1)
Race/ethnicity
Non-Latino white 1512 (75.9)
Non-Latino black 69 (3.5)
Latino 253 (12.7)
Other 158 (7.9)
Pre-pandemic activity level (2018)
Met MVPA guidelines 1046 (52.5)
Did not meet MVPA guidelines 946 (47.5)
Education
<4-year college degree 439 (22.0)
College degree or more 1553 (78.0)
Household income (2018)
<US$50 000 200 (10.0)
 US$50 000 to US$99 999 588 (29.5)
 US$100 000 to US$149 999 562 (28.2)
≥US$150 000 642 (32.2)
Had COVID-19 (self-report) 212 (10.6)
Live alone 243 (12.2)
Altered caregiving responsibilities
Disrupted childcare 338 (17.0)
No change in childcare 68 (3.4)
Not a child caregiver 1586 (79.6)
Change in work status
Laid off/furloughed 110 (5.5)
Worked remotely 930 (46.7)
Worked remote +laid off 73 (3.7)
No change in work status 879 (44.1)

BMI, body mass index; CPS-3, Cancer Prevention Study-3; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity.

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2021-053817supp001.pdf (60.1KB, pdf)

Overall changes in movement behaviours

The proportion of daily time spent in specific movement behaviours was statistically significantly different between 2018 and the summer of 2020 (F=87.36, p<0.0001; figure 1 and online supplemental table 3). Compared to 2018, participants spent an additional 104 min/day (7.2% of the day) sedentary, 61 fewer min/day (4.2% of the day) in LPA and 43 fewer min/day (3.0%) in MVPA during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although time spent strength training was minimal at both time points, the relative time spent strength training was significantly lower during the COVID-19 pandemic (online supplemental figure 1). Daily time spent sleeping was largely similar between the two time points.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Proportion of time per day spent in each movement behaviour in (A) 2018 and (B) Summer 2020 (the COVID-19 survey). P-difference in 24-hour time-use between the two time points <0.0001. MOD-VIG, moderate-to-vigorous; PA, physical activity; SED, sedentary.

Differences by sex

Changes in movement behaviours between the two time points were different among men and women (p-interaction by sex=0.024, figure 2A). In 2018, men spent more time in MVPA (7.4% of the day, or 107 min/day) than women (3.1% of the day, or 45 min/day). There was a larger decrease in MVPA during the pandemic for men compared with women (men: −66 min/day, women: −35 min/day). PA time lost from 2018 to the pandemic was reallocated to sedentary time for both men and women, resulting in an additional 130 min/day (an additional 9% of the day) and 92 min/day (an additional 6.4% of the day) of sedentary time for men and women, respectively.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Proportion of time per day spent in each movement behaviour in 2018 and Summer 2020 (the COVID-19 survey) by (A) sex, (B) level of education, (C) 2018 physical activity level, (D) COVID-related change in work status and (E) body mass index category. LPA, light intensity physical activity; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; SED, sedentary; MET, metabolic equivalent hours/week.

Differences by highest educational attainment and household income

Those with a college degree were more active prior to the pandemic (5.1% of the day, or 73 min/day) and had larger decreases in MVPA during the pandemic (−53 min/day) than those with less than a college degree (2.3% of the day, or 33 min/day of MVPA in 2018; −26 min/day MVPA; p-interaction by education=0.014; figure 2B). Both education groups also experienced large increases in sedentary time during the pandemic for (an additional 112 min/day for those with higher education and 76 min/day for those with lower education). Differences by pre-pandemic household income followed a very similar pattern (p-interaction by income=0.043; data not shown).

Differences by pre-pandemic activity levels

Participants who met aerobic PA guidelines in 2018 experienced larger decreases in the proportion of time spent in MVPA compared with those who did not meet guidelines before the pandemic (−151 min/day vs −9 min/day; p-interaction=0.0009, figure 2C). Some of the time both activity groups spent on MVPA in 2018 was reallocated to sedentary time during the pandemic; however, those who were active before the pandemic also spent a larger proportion of time sleeping during the pandemic compared with 2018 (an additional 56 min/day). There was no difference in sleep time before and during the pandemic among those who were inactive in 2018.

Differences by change in work status

Changes in movement patterns were largely similar among those with a change in work status, although those who were laid off during the pandemic increased sleep duration (an additional 68 min/day), whereas other groups largely maintained consistent sleep time between the two time points (p-interaction=0.039, figure 2D).

Differences by BMI

Differences in movement patterns were largely similar by broad BMI category. However, participants with a normal BMI had a larger decrease in the proportion of time in MVPA compared with participants with overweight or obesity (−54 min/day vs −33 min/day; p-interaction <0.0001, figure 2E).

Other stratified results

Differences in movement behaviours between the two time points were similar among participants of all age groups (p-interaction=0.071) and among participants with different living arrangements (p-interaction=0.267), COVID-19 history (p-interaction=0.476) and childcare responsibilities (p-interaction=0.807).

Discussion

Using data from a prospective national cohort, results from this study suggest that US adults decreased daily light and MVPA, and increased sedentary time from 2018 to Summer 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The changes in time spent on various movement behaviours at the two time points were even more pronounced among men, those with a higher level of education, and those who were meeting PA guidelines before the pandemic. Even those with no notable pandemic-related changes in work (eg, did not shift to remote work, were not laid off or furloughed or were retired prior to the pandemic) still spent nearly 1.5 additional hours/day sedentary—time that had been spent on LPA and MVPA before the pandemic. Additional research will not only benefit people during the remainder of the COVID-19 pandemic but may also be applicable for any potential future pandemics, natural disasters or similar events that disrupt daily life.

Whether or not these unhealthy temporal shifts in movement behaviours will last long-term is unknown. Nevertheless, even short-term changes in movement behaviours may negatively affect mental and physical health. Acute increases in sedentary time and decreases in PA are associated with decreased fat oxidation, increased blood glucose levels, higher resting blood pressure and increased feelings of depression.37–39 Particularly pressing in the time of an infectious disease pandemic, physical inactivity can downregulate the ability of systems to resist to viral infections, while PA has been shown to increase the efficacy of vaccines.40 41

Promoting more PA and less sedentary time during the COVID-19 pandemic brings about a new public health challenge for which there are several feasible solutions. In the current study, while total walking time decreased during the pandemic, the proportion of MVPA comprised of brisk walking remained consistent from 2018 to Summer 2020. This may mean that the promotion of walking as a means of exercise may be one practical way to achieve pre-pandemic MVPA time, especially in places where indoor gyms and studios remain closed. Importantly, outdoor walking is an activity that may be done while wearing a facial covering and remaining physically distanced. If outdoor walking is not a feasible option because of neighbourhood walkability or traffic and crime safety, Dwyer et al have adapted currently available web-based resources for remaining active at home during the pandemic.42 However, as demonstrated in the current study, a narrowed focus on MVPA is likely insufficient, as it ignores the importance of less sedentary time and more LPA. There are many approaches for the promotion of decreased sedentary time through increased LPA at home, especially while working from home, such as setting goals and self-monitoring, computer-based prompts, employee incentive programmes and television or social media time control devices.43 44

This study is not without limitations. First, participants in the CPS-3 subcohort were predominately college educated and more physically active than the general US population, which may limit generalisability of these results. As we still saw a reduction in the proportion of participants meeting PA guidelines throughout the pandemic in this very active cohort, we might expect to see even fewer continuing to meet guidelines among the general US population. Additionally, this study relied on self-reported activity data, which may be susceptible to social desirability or other biases that may have led to an overestimation of PA and underestimation of sedentary time, biasing results towards the null. It is worth noting that validation studies of the survey used in this study found that this survey produces estimates of LPA, MVPA and sedentary time that are very similar to accelerometry.31–33 It is also possible that the average increase in sedentary time and decrease in physical activity from 2018 to 2020 seen in this study reflects a trend consistent with ageing, and was not necessarily caused by the pandemic. However, there was a relatively short time period between surveys (2.2 years on average) with an average decrease in MVPA time of 43 min/day from the 2018 to the COVID-19 survey. For context, the average change in reported PA from the 2015 to 2018 CPS-3 surveys in these same participants (average of 2.9 years apart) was +22 min/day. Given the differences in reported PA over a short period of time in the current study, it seems likely that these differences are indeed a reflection of the pandemic. Strengths of this study include the use of prospective data, with data collected before and during the pandemic, and the consideration of the whole day of movement behaviours, which allows for a more comprehensive understanding of shifts in 24-hour time-use.

Moving more and sitting less has numerous documented benefits, making the temporal shifts observed in this study away from PA towards sedentary time during the pandemic very concerning. As Americans were already struggling to meet PA guidelines before the pandemic, there is an urgent need to organise efforts in promoting more PA and less sedentary time during this public health crisis to avoid sustaining these unfavourable shifts in movement behaviours long-term.

Supplementary Material

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Acknowledgments

The authors express sincere appreciation to all Cancer Prevention Study-3 participants, and to each member of the study and biospecimen management group. The authors assume full responsibility for all analyses and interpretation of results. The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the American Cancer Society or the American Cancer Society—Cancer Action Network.

Footnotes

Contributors: ER-P, JN, SC, LRT and AP designed the study. MHR and RAH collected the data. RAH and CCN performed all data analysis. ER-P wrote the first draft. All authors discussed results and provided critical feedback to the final draft. ER-P is responsible for the overall content as guarantor.

Funding: The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests: None declared.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material: This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Data are from the Cancer Prevention Study-3 and are available (some restrictions apply) from the American Cancer Society by following the ACS Data Access Procedures (https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/epidemiology/cancer-prevention-study-data-access-policies.pdf) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Consent obtained directly from patient(s).

Ethics approval

The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of Emory University #00059007.

References

  • 1.National Academy For State Health Policy . Chart: each state’s COVID-19 reopening and reclosing plans and mask requirements, 2020. Available: https://www.nashp.org/governors-prioritize-health-for-all/ [Accessed 20 Jul 2020].
  • 2.Dumuid D, Pedišić Željko, Palarea-Albaladejo J, et al. Compositional data analysis in time-use epidemiology: what, why, how. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:2220. 10.3390/ijerph17072220 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Dumuid D, Stanford TE, Martin-Fernández J-A, et al. Compositional data analysis for physical activity, sedentary time and sleep research. Stat Methods Med Res 2018;27:3726–38. 10.1177/0962280217710835 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Rosenberger ME, Fulton JE, Buman MP, et al. The 24-hour activity cycle: a new paradigm for physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2019;51:454–64. 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001811 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Biswas A, Oh PI, Faulkner GE, et al. Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2015;162:123. 10.7326/M14-1651 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cappuccio FP, D'Elia L, Strazzullo P, et al. Sleep duration and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Sleep 2010;33:585–92. 10.1093/sleep/33.5.585 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ekelund U, Steene-Johannessen J, Brown WJ, et al. Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women. Lancet 2016;388:1302–10. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30370-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gallicchio L, Kalesan B. Sleep duration and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sleep Res 2009;18:148–58. 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2008.00732.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Moore SC, Lee I-M, Weiderpass E, et al. Association of leisure-time physical activity with risk of 26 types of cancer in 1.44 million adults. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:816–25. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.1548 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rhodes RE, Liu S, Lithopoulos A, et al. Correlates of perceived physical activity transitions during the COVID-19 pandemic among Canadian adults. Appl Psychol Health Well Being 2020;12:1157–82. 10.1111/aphw.12236 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wang Y, Zhang Y, Bennell K, et al. Physical distancing measures and walking activity in middle-aged and older residents in Changsha, China, during the COVID-19 epidemic period: longitudinal observational study. J Med Internet Res 2020;22:e21632-e. 10.2196/21632 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Deschasaux-Tanguy M, Druesne-Pecollo N, Esseddik Y, et al. Diet and physical activity during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown (March–May 2020): results from the French NutriNet-Santé cohort study. Am J Clin Nutr 2021;113:924–38. 10.1093/ajcn/nqaa336 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Alomari MA, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH. Changes in physical activity and sedentary behavior amid confinement: the BKSQ-COVID-19 project. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2020;13:1757–64. 10.2147/RMHP.S268320 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Janssen X, Fleming L, Kirk A, et al. Changes in physical activity, sitting and sleep across the COVID-19 national lockdown period in Scotland. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:9362. 10.3390/ijerph17249362 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Castañeda-Babarro A, Arbillaga-Etxarri A, Gutiérrez-Santamaría B, et al. Physical activity change during COVID-19 confinement. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:6878. 10.3390/ijerph17186878 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Cheval B, Sivaramakrishnan H, Maltagliati S, et al. Relationships between changes in self-reported physical activity, sedentary behaviour and health during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in France and Switzerland. J Sports Sci 2021;39:699–704. 10.1080/02640414.2020.1841396 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Rogers NT, Waterlow NR, Brindle H, et al. Behavioral change towards reduced intensity physical activity is disproportionately prevalent among adults with serious health issues or Self-Perception of high risk during the UK COVID-19 Lockdown. Front Public Health 2020;8:575091. 10.3389/fpubh.2020.575091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.McCarthy H, Potts HWW, Fisher A. Physical activity behavior before, during, and after COVID-19 restrictions: longitudinal smartphone-tracking study of adults in the United Kingdom. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e23701. 10.2196/23701 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Knell G, Robertson MC, Dooley EE, et al. Health behavior changes during COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent "stay-at-home" orders. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17:6268. 10.3390/ijerph17176268 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Tremblay MS, Aubert S, Barnes JD. Sedentary behavior research network (SBRN) – terminology consensus project process and outcome. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2017;14:75. 10.1186/s12966-017-0525-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Advani I, Gunge D, Banks S, et al. Is increased sleep responsible for reductions in myocardial infarction during the COVID-19 pandemic? Am J Cardiol 2020;131:128–30. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.06.027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cellini N, Canale N, Mioni G, et al. Changes in sleep pattern, sense of time and digital media use during COVID‐19 lockdown in Italy. J Sleep Res 2020;29:e13074. 10.1111/jsr.13074 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Leone MJ, Sigman M, Golombek DA. Effects of lockdown on human sleep and chronotype during the COVID-19 pandemic. Curr Biol 2020;30:R930–1. 10.1016/j.cub.2020.07.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ong JL, Lau T, Massar SAA. COVID-19 related mobility reduction: heterogenous effects on sleep and physical activity rhythms. Sleep 2020:zsaa179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Chouchou F, Augustini M, Caderby T, et al. The importance of sleep and physical activity on well-being during COVID-19 lockdown: reunion island as a case study. Sleep Med 2021;77:297–301. 10.1016/j.sleep.2020.09.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Gao C, Scullin MK. Sleep health early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in the United States: integrating longitudinal, cross-sectional, and retrospective recall data. Sleep Med 2020;73:1–10. 10.1016/j.sleep.2020.06.032 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Ernstsen L, Havnen A. Mental health and sleep disturbances in physically active adults during the COVID-19 lockdown in Norway: does change in physical activity level matter? Sleep Med 2021;77:309–12. 10.1016/j.sleep.2020.08.030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kocevska D, Blanken TF, Van Someren EJW, et al. Sleep quality during the COVID-19 pandemic: not one size fits all. Sleep Med 2020;76:86–8. 10.1016/j.sleep.2020.09.029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Sallis JF, Adlakha D, Oyeyemi A, et al. An international physical activity and public health research agenda to inform coronavirus disease-2019 policies and practices. J Sport Health Sci 2020;9:328–34. 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.05.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Patel AV, Jacobs EJ, Dudas DM, et al. The American cancer society’s cancer prevention study 3 (CPS-3): recruitment, study design, and baseline characteristics. Cancer 2017;123:2014–24. 10.1002/cncr.30561 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Rees-Punia E, Matthews CE, Evans EM, et al. Demographic-specific validity of the cancer prevention Study-3 sedentary time survey. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2019;51:41–8. 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001743 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Rees-Punia E, Matthews CE, Evans EM, et al. Reliability and validity of the cancer prevention Study-3 physical activity survey items. J Meas Phys Behav 2019;2:157–65. 10.1123/jmpb.2018-0052 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Subbiah K, Rees-Punia E, Patel AV. Reliability and validity of self-reported muscle-strengthening exercise in the cancer prevention Study-3. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Aitchison J. The statistical analysis of compositional data. J Royal Stat Soc 1982;44:139–60. 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1982.tb01195.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.DHHS . Physical activity guidelines for Americans. 2nd edn, 2018. https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Kg B, Tolosana R, Bren M. Compositions: compositional data analysis. R (version Q 2.2.0) 2014.
  • 37.Gao Y, Silvennoinen M, Pesola AJ, et al. Acute metabolic response, energy expenditure, and EMG activity in sitting and standing. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2017;49:1927–34. 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001305 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hallgren M, Nguyen T-T-D, Owen N, et al. Associations of interruptions to leisure-time sedentary behaviour with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Transl Psychiatry 2020;10:128. 10.1038/s41398-020-0810-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Larsen RN, Kingwell BA, Sethi P, et al. Breaking up prolonged sitting reduces resting blood pressure in overweight/obese adults. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2014;24:976–82. 10.1016/j.numecd.2014.04.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Simpson RJ, Katsanis E. The immunological case for staying active during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brain Behav Immun 2020;87:6–7. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Woods JA, Hutchinson NT, Powers SK, et al. The COVID-19 pandemic and physical activity. Sports Med Health Sci 2020;2:55–64. 10.1016/j.smhs.2020.05.006 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Dwyer MJ, Pasini M, De Dominicis S, et al. Physical activity: benefits and challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2020;30:1291–4. 10.1111/sms.13710 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Gardiner P, Healy G, Owen N, et al. A review of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour in older adults. J Aging Phys Act 2012;20:S302–3. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Shrestha N, Grgic J, Wiesner G, et al. Effectiveness of interventions for reducing non-occupational sedentary behaviour in adults and older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 2019;53:1206–13. 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098270 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary data

bmjopen-2021-053817supp001.pdf (60.1KB, pdf)

Reviewer comments
Author's manuscript

Data Availability Statement

Data are available upon reasonable request. Data are from the Cancer Prevention Study-3 and are available (some restrictions apply) from the American Cancer Society by following the ACS Data Access Procedures (https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/epidemiology/cancer-prevention-study-data-access-policies.pdf) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.


Articles from BMJ Open are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES