The effect of exercise and affect regulation skills on mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.01.20144105: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The study was approved by the local ethics committee for research at the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences and registered on the German Clinical Trial Register (DRKS00021791).
    Consent: Before starting the survey, participants provided informed consent.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Data preparation and statistical analyses were carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, version 26).
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has several limitations: Since the design was cross-sectional, results cannot be interpreted causally. Further longitudinal data that will be available in the upcoming measurement will shed more light on the associations between changes in exercise and social support on the attenuation or aggravation of psychopathological symptoms. The sample was mostly composed of females. Further the mean age was quite low (mean age 33 year). Therefore, the representativeness of this sample is limited. Although the recruiting was not directed to people with mental disorders (such as clinics or hospitals) and it was announced as a study about the “protective factors for mental health”, there might be a self-selection bias. Especially people that suffered from mental problem might have been more interested in participating in the study causing the very high prevalence. Further methodological limitations comprise the assessment of the change in exercise and anxiety symptoms (only one item each). Further work-related and leisure-time related PA was not analyzed, which could bias our results. Lastly the model fit can be assumed as adequate for depression with an explained variance of 41 %, however the explained variance for anxiety (20 %) and sleep (26 %) can be considered as low.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.