You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Sampasa‐Kanyinga H, Colman I, Hamilton HA, Chaput J‐P. Outdoor physical activity, compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations, and excess weight among adolescents. Obes Sci Pract. 2020;6:196--206. 10.1002/osp4.389

1. INTRODUCTION {#osp4389-sec-0005}
===============

Physical activity is essential for healthy development of children and adolescents and is associated with important physical, mental, and social health benefits.[1](#osp4389-bib-0001){ref-type="ref"}, [2](#osp4389-bib-0002){ref-type="ref"} However, more than 80% of the world\'s adolescent population is insufficiently physically active.[3](#osp4389-bib-0003){ref-type="ref"} A recent study suggests that the majority (76%) of Canadian youth aged 12 to 17 years do not meet the current physical activity guidelines of at least 60 minutes of moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity (MPVA) per day compared with 52% of 5 to 11 year‐olds.[4](#osp4389-bib-0004){ref-type="ref"} Today\'s children and adolescents spend a large amount of their time sedentary, mainly in the form of screen time behaviours such as smartphone, tablet, and recreational computer use, TV viewing, and video gaming. This is alarming because physical activity and sedentary behaviour habits formed during childhood may extend into adulthood.[5](#osp4389-bib-0005){ref-type="ref"}, [6](#osp4389-bib-0006){ref-type="ref"} Spending time outdoor has been identified as an important way to achieve the physical activity required for maintaining and improving health and to lower sedentary time among young children.[7](#osp4389-bib-0007){ref-type="ref"}, [8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"}, [9](#osp4389-bib-0009){ref-type="ref"}, [10](#osp4389-bib-0010){ref-type="ref"} For example, a study of 1159 children aged 7 to 14 years found that children reporting more time outdoors were more active, less sedentary, and less likely to have peer relationship problems compared with those who spent less time outdoors.[8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"} However, evidence of such relationships in adolescents is particularly limited.

Surprisingly, previous research has focused on examining the influence of outdoor time on physical activity, screen time, and other physical and social outcomes[7](#osp4389-bib-0007){ref-type="ref"}, [8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"}; however, its relationship with sleep duration has received very little attention. Sleep is an essential component of healthy development and is required for physical and mental health.[11](#osp4389-bib-0011){ref-type="ref"} Short sleep duration has become common in modern societies, with recent research indicating that nearly one third of Canadian children and adolescents sleep less than recommended by public health authorities for optimal health.[12](#osp4389-bib-0012){ref-type="ref"}, [13](#osp4389-bib-0013){ref-type="ref"} A study using a sample of 433 Canadian children aged 10 to 13 years found that outdoor active play was a modest predictor of time in bed but it was not associated with sleep duration, sleep chronology, or sleep efficiency.[14](#osp4389-bib-0014){ref-type="ref"} Physical activity has been indicated to contribute to better sleep throughout the lifespan.[15](#osp4389-bib-0015){ref-type="ref"} Thus, frequent outdoor physical activity could be associated with better adherence to the sleep duration recommendation in adolescents.

Childhood obesity is a public health concern that has long‐term implications for physical and mental health.[16](#osp4389-bib-0016){ref-type="ref"} To date, few studies have investigated whether outdoor physical activity is directly associated with body weight status among adolescents. Most studies focused on preschool and young children and found that more time playing outdoors was associated with lower body weight compared with those who spend less time.[17](#osp4389-bib-0017){ref-type="ref"}, [18](#osp4389-bib-0018){ref-type="ref"}, [19](#osp4389-bib-0019){ref-type="ref"}, [20](#osp4389-bib-0020){ref-type="ref"} However, research has shown that children spend more outdoor time than adolescents, and thus cumulate more physical activity time.[21](#osp4389-bib-0021){ref-type="ref"}, [22](#osp4389-bib-0022){ref-type="ref"} A study of over 1600 Indian school children aged 10 to 15 years found that the prevalence of both overweight and obesity were greater among students who did not participate in outdoor sports.[23](#osp4389-bib-0023){ref-type="ref"} However, this study did not include older adolescents and may thus have overestimated the strength of this association.

Moreover, previous studies have mainly focused on time spent outdoors. This can conflate physical activity with many other activities that adolescents engage in while outside.[22](#osp4389-bib-0022){ref-type="ref"} A more precise measure that includes the specific type of activity youth engage in while outside, such as "outdoor physical activity," and the frequency of such an activity at the population level of adolescents is needed. This is important because technological and societal changes have resulted in secular trends that have impacted the types of activities performed by children.[24](#osp4389-bib-0024){ref-type="ref"} There is a decline in time spent playing outdoors,[25](#osp4389-bib-0025){ref-type="ref"} a switch from unstructured outdoor to structured indoor activities (eg, competitive sports and music practice)[7](#osp4389-bib-0007){ref-type="ref"} and a substantial increase in time spent using electronic media in recent decades.[24](#osp4389-bib-0024){ref-type="ref"}

Thus, the present study investigated the relationships between frequency of outdoor physical activity after school, adherence to the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations, and overweight/obesity among a representative sample of adolescents. We hypothesized that more frequent outdoor physical activity after school would result in better adherence to the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations and lower overweight/obesity prevalence.

2. METHODS {#osp4389-sec-0006}
==========

Data for this study were obtained from the 2017 Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey (OSDUHS), a school‐based study of students in grades 7 through 12 (aged 11‐20 y or older) in publicly funded schools across Ontario, Canada. Conducted every 2 years since 1977, the OSDUHS is the longest ongoing school survey of adolescents in Canada and one of the longest in the world. The OSDUHS uses a two‐stage (school, class) stratified (region and school type) cluster design and sampled 11 435 students from 52 school boards, 214 schools, and 764 classrooms in 2017. The student participation rate was 63%, which is above average for a student survey that required active consent from a parent or guardian.[26](#osp4389-bib-0026){ref-type="ref"} Reasons for nonparticipation included absenteeism (11%) and parental refusal or unreturned consent forms (26%).[27](#osp4389-bib-0027){ref-type="ref"} Detailed information on the study design and methods are available elsewhere.[27](#osp4389-bib-0027){ref-type="ref"} All participants provided their signed assent in addition to parentally signed consent for those aged under 18. The survey received research ethics approval from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and from York University, as well as existing research review committees of participating school boards.

2.1. Measures {#osp4389-sec-0007}
-------------

### 2.1.1. Outdoor physical activity {#osp4389-sec-0008}

Frequency of physical activity outdoor after school was measured using an item that asked how many of the last five school days students were physically active outside after school, such as playing games or sports (does not include travel mode home from school or any inside activities). Response options included 0, 1 to 2, 3 to 4, and all 5 days.

### 2.1.2. Physical activity recommendation {#osp4389-sec-0009}

Physical activity was assessed using a question that asked participants how many of the last 7 days they were physically active for at least 60 minutes each day. Students were categorized as meeting the current physical activity recommendation of at least 60 minutes per day of MVPA on all 7 days, or not.[28](#osp4389-bib-0028){ref-type="ref"}

### 2.1.3. Screen time recommendation {#osp4389-sec-0010}

Students were asked how many hours a day, on average, in their free time they spent watching TV/movies/videos, playing video/computer games, texting, emailing, or surfing the Internet in the last 7 days. Students meeting the screen time guideline of less than or equal to 2 hours per day were compared with those not meeting the screen time guideline.[28](#osp4389-bib-0028){ref-type="ref"}

### 2.1.4. Sleep duration recommendation {#osp4389-sec-0011}

Sleep duration was assessed using a question that asked participants how many hours of sleep on an average school night they usually get. A binary variable was created to contrast students who had a sleep duration that met or exceeded the recommended range (9‐11 h/night for 11‐ to 13‐year‐olds; 8‐10 h/night for 14‐ to17‐year‐olds; or 7‐9 h/night for those 18 years of age or older) with those who reported a short sleep duration (less than 9 h/night for 11‐ to 13‐year‐olds; less than 8 h/night for 14‐ to 17‐year‐olds; or less than 7 h/night for those 18 years of age or older).[28](#osp4389-bib-0028){ref-type="ref"}, [29](#osp4389-bib-0029){ref-type="ref"}

### 2.1.5. Body mass index {#osp4389-sec-0012}

Students self‐reported their height and weight and the response options were precoded. The item that measured height provided a total of 27 options in feet/centimetres, while the one that measured weight provided 42 options in 5‐lb (or equivalent kilogramme) intervals. We used the midpoint of the height and the weight response categories and calculated body mass index (BMI) as weight divided by the square of height (kilogrammes/metres^2^). Overweight and obesity were defined using the World Health Organization\'s sex‐ and age‐specific BMI cut points established for children and youth[30](#osp4389-bib-0030){ref-type="ref"} and the International Classification for students over 19 years (n = 12). A dichotomous variable was created contrasting "overweight or obesity" with "normal weight," which included for the present study both the normal and underweight categories. A sensitivity analysis excluding the underweight students (n = 506) provided similar results.

2.2. Covariates {#osp4389-sec-0013}
---------------

Covariates included age (in years), sex (male/female), ethnicity (white, black, East/Southeast Asian, South Asian, and others), subjective socioeconomic status (SES), parental education and support, and perceived school economic status. Subjective SES was assessed using the youth version of the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status.[31](#osp4389-bib-0031){ref-type="ref"} Participants indicated the rung that best represents their family\'s place in Canadian society with respect to money, education, and occupation. Responses were treated as a scale ranging from 1 to 10; the higher the rung, the higher the perceived family subjective social status, including more money, higher education, and highly respected occupations. Educational level of the father and mother were measured by the following items: "How far did your father go in school?" and "How far did your mother go in school?" Response options were treated as a scale ranging from 8 years (did not attend high school) to 16 years (graduated university) for each parent. Means for father (14.3 y; SD = 2.0) and mother (14.5 y; SD = 1.8) education levels were used when respective level of education was not available (father\'s: 22.7% and mother\'s: 18%). Parental support was measured by an item that asked students to determine how often they talked about their problems or feelings with at least one of their parents. Response options ranged from "Always" to "Never". Responses were reverse coded, so that higher scores indicate higher levels of parental support. School subjective social status was measured using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status.[31](#osp4389-bib-0031){ref-type="ref"}, [32](#osp4389-bib-0032){ref-type="ref"} The questionnaire included a 10‐rung ladder to represent the social hierarchy at school. At the top of the ladder are the people in school with the most respect and the highest standing, and at the bottom of the ladder are the people who no one respects and no one wants to hang out with. Response options were treated as a scale ranging from 1 to 10. Covariates were selected based on previous publications,[8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"}, [22](#osp4389-bib-0022){ref-type="ref"} their availability in the dataset, and their association with the dependent and independent variables.

2.3. Data analysis {#osp4389-sec-0014}
------------------

Taylor series methods within Stata 14.0 (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas) were utilized for analyses to account for the complex survey sample design and obtain unbiased variances and point estimates. Analyses included population weights to adjust for the unequal probability of selection. Conventional descriptive statistics, such as proportions and means, were used to describe the sample. Pearson χ^2^ test, adjusted for survey design and transformed into an *F* statistic, examined sex differences in categorical data compared with the adjusted Wald test for continuous data. Separate two‐way interactions were used to test interactions involving outdoor physical activity and sex for each of the outcome variables. Given those of physical activity and sleep duration were statistically significant, subsequent analyses were stratified by sex. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine the associations between the number of days spent physically active outdoors after school with the outcome variables of compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations, and overweight/obesity among adolescents. Potential confounders included age, sex, ethnic background, subjective socioeconomic status, father education level, mother education level, parental support, and school subjective social status. Odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and *P* values are reported. Separate two‐way interactions were used to test interactions involving outdoor physical activity variables and sex for each of the outcome variables. Only participants with complete information on all variables were included in the current analyses. Missing values (n = 1407, representing 12.3% of the total sample) represented less than 5% for any of the variables examined, and the probability of the outcome variables were not significantly different between missing and nonmissing cases.

3. RESULTS {#osp4389-sec-0015}
==========

Descriptive characteristics of the sample stratified by sex are outlined in Table [1](#osp4389-tbl-0001){ref-type="table"}. About half of the sample was female (49%), over 54.6% identified themselves as white, and the average age was 15 years. One‐in‐five students (20.9%) reported being physically active outdoor in all 5 days. The majority of students were in high school (75.5%) and did not meet the physical activity (76.7%), screen time (66.6%), or sleep duration (66.3%) recommendations. Nearly one third of the respondents (30.7%) were classified as overweight/obese. Females were more likely to perceive higher levels of parental support and to report a higher school subjective social status than their male counterparts, while males were more likely than females to be physically active outdoor after school on all 5 days of the week and to meet physical activity and sleep duration recommendations.

###### 

Descriptive characteristics of the sample

                                              Total sample   Males         Females       *P* value^a^
  ------------------------------------------- -------------- ------------- ------------- --------------
  Total                                       10028 (100)    4333 (51.3)   5695 (48.8)   
  Age                                                                                    
  Mean (SD)                                   15.2 (1.8)     15.2 (1.7)    15.1 (1.9)    .221
  Grade                                                                                  
  7                                           1418 (11.7)    614 (11.0)    804 (12.4)    .819
  8                                           1702 (12.7)    801 (13.2)    901 (12.1)    
  9                                           1927 (16.2)    784 (15.9)    1143 (16.6)   
  10                                          1758 (17.3)    794 (17.5)    964 (17.0)    
  11                                          1592 (18.2)    665 (17.6)    927 (18.8)    
  12                                          1631 (24.0)    675 (24.9)    956 (23.2)    
  Ethnic background                                                                      
  White                                       5813 (56.4)    2623 (58.7)   3190 (53.9)   .197
  Black                                       759 (9.7)      295 (9.4)     464 (10.1)    
  East/South‐East Asian                       951 (8.8)      376 (8.4)     575 (9.2)     
  South Asian                                 806 (7.0)      336 (7.1)     470 (6.9)     
  Other                                       1699 (18.1)    703 (16.3)    996 (19.9)    
  Subjective socioeconomic status                                                        
  Mean (SD)                                   6.9 (1.7)      7.0 (1.6)     6.9 (1.8)     .571
  Father education level                                                                 
  Mean (SD)                                   13.0 (3.0)     13.1 (2.8)    12.9 (3.3)    .208
  Mother education level                                                                 
  Mean (SD)                                   13.6 (2.9)     13.5 (2.7)    13.6 (3.0)    .474
  Parental support                                                                       
  Mean (SD)                                   2.9 (1.2)      2.8 (1.1)     3.1 (1.3)     \<.001
  School subjective social status                                                        
  Mean (SD)                                   7.1 (1.9)      7.2 (1.7)     7.9 (2.0)     \<.001
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                 
  0 d                                         2453 (25.3)    782 (18.2)    1671 (32.7)   \<.001
  1 to 2 ds                                   3074 (30.5)    1177 (29.2)   1897 (31.9)   
  3 to 4 d                                    2458 (23.4)    1148 (25.0)   1310 (21.6)   
  All 5 d                                     2043 (20.9)    1226 (27.6)   817 (13.7)    
  Meet the physical activity recommendation                                              
  Do not meet                                 7685 (76.7)    2968 (69.6)   4717 (84.3)   \<.001
  Meet                                        2343 (23.3)    1365 (30.4)   978 (15.7)    
  Meet the screen time recommendation                                                    
  Do not meet                                 6547 (66.6)    2763 (66.0)   3784 (67.2)   .323
  Meet                                        3481 (33.5)    1570 (34.1)   1911 (32.8)   
  Meet the sleep duration recommendation                                                 
  Do not meet                                 6652 (66.3)    2680 (62.5)   3972 (70.4)   \<.001
  Meet                                        3376 (33.7)    1653 (37.5)   1723 (29.7)   
  BMI categories                                                                         
  Normal weight                               7114 (69.3)    2920 (67.0)   4194 (71.7)   .056
  Overweight/obese                            2914 (30.7)    1413 (33.0)   1501 (28.3)   

*Note*. Data are shown as column %, unless otherwise indicated.

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; SD, standard deviation.

*P* values refer to differences between males and females. A Pearson χ^2^ test, adjusted for survey design and transformed into *F*‐statistic, examined sex differences in categorical data compared with an adjusted Wald test for continuous data.

Results from univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses that examined the associations between the number of days spent physically active outdoors after school with the outcome variables of compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations, and overweight/obesity are outlined in Tables [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}, [3](#osp4389-tbl-0003){ref-type="table"}, [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}, [5](#osp4389-tbl-0005){ref-type="table"}. Overall, before and after adjusting for covariates, the number of days spent physically active outdoors showed a positive gradient with compliance with the physical activity (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}) and screen time (Table [3](#osp4389-tbl-0003){ref-type="table"}) recommendations and a negative gradient with overweight/obesity (Table [5](#osp4389-tbl-0005){ref-type="table"}). Significant sex differences were observed in the associations of outdoor physical activity after school with adherence to the sleep duration (Table [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}) and physical activity (Table [1](#osp4389-tbl-0001){ref-type="table"}) recommendations.

###### 

Frequency of physical activity outdoor after school and compliance with the physical activity recommendation among adolescents

                                           Total N = 10 028                                                 Males N = 4333                                                   Females N = 5695
  ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------
  Unadjusted                                                                                                                                                                 
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                                     
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              2.26 (1.71‐2.98)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      1.61 (1.14‐2.27)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0005){ref-type="fn"}        2.93 (1.94‐4.44)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  3 to 4 days                              6.02 (4.25‐8.55)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      5.09 (3.10‐8.36)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      6.05 (4.08‐8.99)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  All 5 days                               42.08 (31.06‐57.01)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}   35.45 (24.79‐50.68)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}   38.03 (25.7‐56.18)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  Adjusted                                                                                                                                                                   
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                                     
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              1.90 (1.43‐2.51)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      1.50 (1.05‐2.16)[\*](#osp4389-note-0004){ref-type="fn"}          2.50 (1.66‐3.77)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  3 to 4 days                              4.69 (3.32‐6.63)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      4.59 (2.68‐7.87)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      4.70 (3.14‐7.04)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  All 5 days                               31.85 (23.40‐43.35)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}   31.82 (21.39‐47.34)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}   31.48 (20.86‐47.51)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  Age                                      0.85 (0.80‐0.89)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      0.86 (0.79‐0.92)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}      0.83 (0.77‐0.90)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}
  Sex                                                                                                                                                                        
  Female                                   1 (reference)                                                                                                                     
  Male                                     1.60 (1.32‐1.94)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0006){ref-type="fn"}                                                                       
  Ethnic background                                                                                                                                                          
  White                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)
  Black                                    0.82 (0.57‐1.17)                                                 0.90 (0.54‐1.50)                                                 0.69 (0.40‐1.78)
  East/South‐East Asian                    0.81 (0.63‐1.04)                                                 0.67 (0.42‐1.08)                                                 1.02 (0.64‐1.62)
  South Asian                              0.87 (0.62‐1.21)                                                 0.78 (0.53‐1.16)                                                 1.00 (0.66‐1.54)
  Other                                    0.67 (0.53‐0.84)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0005){ref-type="fn"}        0.59 (0.42‐0.82)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0005){ref-type="fn"}        0.81 (0.55‐1.18)
  Subjective socioeconomic status          1.03 (0.95‐1.12)                                                 1.02 (0.92‐1.13)                                                 1.05 (0.95‐1.18)
  Father education level                   1.04 (0.99‐1.09)                                                 1.04 (0.98‐1.10)                                                 1.04 (0.97‐1.11)
  Mother education level                   0.99 (0.94‐1.38)                                                 0.98 (0.91‐1.05)                                                 1.01 (0.95‐1.08)
  Parental support                         0.90 (0.82‐0.99)\*                                               0.88 (0.77‐1.01)                                                 0.92 (0.82‐1.04)
  School subjective social status          1.05 (0.99‐1.11)                                                 1.05 (0.98‐1.12)                                                 1.04 (0.94‐1.16)

*P* \< .05.

*P* \< .01.

*P* \< .001.

###### 

Frequency of physical activity outdoor after school and compliance with the screen time recommendation among adolescents

                                           Total N = 10028                                               Males N = 4333                                                Females N = 5695
  ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------
  Unadjusted                                                                                                                                                           
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                               
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              1.33 (0.98‐1.81)                                              1.31 (0.92‐1.86)                                              1.41 (0.99‐2.03)
  3 to 4 days                              2.04 (1.51‐2.78)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   2.17 (1.55‐3.03)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   2.07 (1.37‐3.14)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}
  All 5 days                               3.59 (2.65‐4.88)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   4.16 (2.61‐6.61)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   3.23 (2.46‐4.23)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}
  Adjusted                                                                                                                                                             
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                               
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              1.18 (0.93‐1.51)                                              1.14 (0.84‐1.56)                                              1.28 (0.97‐1.68)
  3 to 4 days                              1.69 (1.34‐2.14)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   1.79 (1.32‐2.41)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   1.73 (1.26‐2.38)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}
  ll 5 days                                3.02 (2.26‐4.04)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   3.35 (2.10‐5.36)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   2.76 (2.14‐3.54)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}\*
  Age                                      0.95 (0.90‐0.99)\*                                            0.92 (0.87‐0.97)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}     0.98 (0.91‐1.05)
  Sex                                                                                                                                                                  
  Female                                   1 (reference)                                                                                                               
  Male                                     0.89 (0.81‐0.98)[\*](#osp4389-note-0007){ref-type="fn"}                                                                     
  Ethnic background                                                                                                                                                    
  White                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  Black                                    0.82 (0.48‐1.40)                                              0.87 (0.38‐1.97)                                              0.78 (0.51‐1.18)
  East/South‐East Asian                    0.61 (0.47‐0.80)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   0.59 (0.39‐0.91)[\*](#osp4389-note-0007){ref-type="fn"}       0.64 (0.48‐0.86)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}
  South Asian                              0.93 (0.76‐1.13)                                              0.83 (0.59‐1.15)                                              1.05 (0.83‐1.34)
  Other                                    0.88 (0.70‐1.11)                                              0.67 (0.51‐0.86)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}     1.11 (0.74‐1.68)
  Subjective socioeconomic status          1.11 (1.06‐1.16)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0009){ref-type="fn"}   1.11 (1.03‐1.20)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}     1.10 (1.03‐1.18)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0008){ref-type="fn"}
  Father education level                   1.02 (0.99‐1.06)                                              1.03 (0.98‐1.08)                                              1.02 (0.95‐1.08)
  Mother education level                   1.00 (0.95‐1.05)                                              1.00 (0.95‐1.06)                                              1.00 (0.94‐1.06)
  Parental support                         1.10 (1.02‐1.19)[\*](#osp4389-note-0007){ref-type="fn"}       1.09 (1.00‐1.18)[\*](#osp4389-note-0007){ref-type="fn"}       1.11 (0.98‐1.27)
  School subjective social status          1.05 (0.99‐1.10)                                              1.01 (0.95‐1.07)                                              1.08 (1.00‐1.17)[\*](#osp4389-note-0007){ref-type="fn"}

*P* \< .05.

*P* \< .01.

*P* \< .001.

###### 

Frequency of physical activity outdoor after school and compliance with the sleep duration recommendation among adolescents

                                           Total N = 10028                                               Males N = 4333                                                Females N = 5695
  ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------
  Unadjusted                                                                                                                                                           
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                               
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              1.47 (1.17‐1.85)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0011){ref-type="fn"}     1.51 (1.06‐2.15)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       1.38 (1.10‐1.71)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0011){ref-type="fn"}
  3 to 4 days                              1.45 (1.14‐1.85)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0011){ref-type="fn"}     1.45 (1.01‐2.08)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       1.36 (0.98‐1.88)
  All 5 days                               1.72 (1.34‐2.19)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.84 (1.31‐2.58)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.23 (0.91‐1.68)
  Adjusted                                                                                                                                                             
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                               
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              1.24 (0.99‐1.55)                                              1.38 (0.95‐2.01)                                              1.11 (0.87‐1.42)
  3 to 4 days                              1.12 (0.87‐1.45)                                              1.25 (0.81‐1.92)                                              1.00 (0.70‐1.45)
  All 5 days                               1.24 (0.95‐1.61)                                              1.53 (1.01‐2.31)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       0.92 (0.65‐1.30)
  Age                                      0.96 (0.92‐0.99)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       098 (0.91‐1.05)                                               0.92 (0.86‐0.99)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}
  Sex                                                                                                                                                                  
  Female                                   1 (reference)                                                                                                               
  Male                                     1.46 (1.28‐1.66)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}                                                                 
  Ethnic background                                                                                                                                                    
  White                                    1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)                                                 1 (reference)
  Black                                    0.84 (0.62‐1.23)                                              1.25 (0.91‐1.05)                                              0.49 (0.36‐0.65)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}
  East/Southeast Asian                     0.82 (0.66‐1.00)                                              0.73 (0.81‐0.97)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       0.91 (0.67‐1.23)
  South Asian                              0.83 (0.66‐1.04)                                              0.90 (0.63‐1.28)                                              0.73 (0.53‐1.02)
  Other                                    0.89 (0.74‐1.07)                                              0.85 (0.61‐1.19)                                              0.88 (0.70‐1.11)
  Subjective socioeconomic status          1.14 (1.06‐1.22)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.15 (1.07‐1.23)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.13 (1.04‐1.22)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0011){ref-type="fn"}
  Father education level                   0.99 (0.97‐1.02)                                              1.03 (1.00‐1.07)                                              0.95 (0.92‐0.98)
  Mother education level                   0.98 (0.96‐1.01)                                              0.97 (0.92‐1.02)                                              0.99 (0.95‐1.03)
  Parental support                         1.20 (1.13‐1.26)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.16 (1.07‐1.25)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0012){ref-type="fn"}   1.26 (1.17‐1.37)
  School subjective social status          1.04 (1.00‐1.08)[\*](#osp4389-note-0010){ref-type="fn"}       1.02 (0.97‐1.06)                                              1.07 (1.00‐1.14)

*P* \< .05.

*P* \< .01

*P* \< .001.

###### 

Frequency of physical activity outdoor after school and odds of overweight/obesity[1](#osp4389-note-0016){ref-type="fn"} among adolescents

                                           Total N = 10028                                                  Males N = 4333                                                 Females N = 5695
  ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------
  Unadjusted                                                                                                                                                               
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                                   
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                  1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              0.76 (0.63 -- 0.91)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}     0.73 (0.50 -- 1.05)                                            0.74 (0.57 -- 0.96)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}
  3 to 4 days                              0.71 (0.59 -- 0.87)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}     0.69 (0.53 -- 0.91)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}   0.66 (0.50 -- 0.88)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}
  All 5 days                               0.69 (0.57 -- 0.83)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0015){ref-type="fn"}   0.65 (0.47 -- 0.89)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}   0.59 (0.82 -- 0.82)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}
  Adjusted                                                                                                                                                                 
  Frequency of physical activity outdoor                                                                                                                                   
  0 day                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                  1 (reference)
  1 to 2 days                              0.79 (0.65 -- 0.96)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}       0.79 (0.57 -- 1.09)                                            0.80 (0.64 -- 1.01)
  3 to 4 days                              0.76 (0.63 -- 0.92)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}     0.80 (0.61 -- 1.05)                                            0.76 (0.55 -- 1.04)
  All 5 days                               0.68 (0.55 -- 0.84)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}     0.74 (0.55 -- 1.00)                                            0.61 (0.43 -- 0.86)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}
  Age                                      1.01 (0.97 -- 1.05)                                              1.01 (0.95 -- 1.07)                                            1.00 (0.95 -- 1.06)
  Sex                                                                                                                                                                      
  Female                                   1 (reference)                                                                                                                   
  Male                                     1.42 (1.14‐1.76)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}                                                                       
  Ethnic background                                                                                                                                                        
  White                                    1 (reference)                                                    1 (reference)                                                  1 (reference)
  Black                                    1.66 (1.36‐2.04)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0015){ref-type="fn"}      1.06 (0.58‐1.93)                                               2.60 (1.62‐4.15)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0015){ref-type="fn"}
  East/Southeast Asian                     0.70 (0.56‐0.88)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}        0.88 (0.62‐1.23)                                               0.52 (0.38‐0.71)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0015){ref-type="fn"}
  South Asian                              0.77 (0.62‐0.96)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}          0.79 (0.59‐1.04)                                               0.76 (0.57‐1.02)
  Other                                    1.18 (0.96‐1.44)                                                 1.09 (0.80‐1.48)                                               1.29 (1.01‐1.64)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}
  Subjective socioeconomic status          0.92 (0.88‐0.97)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}        0.89 (0.83‐0.94)[\*\*\*](#osp4389-note-0015){ref-type="fn"}    0.98 (0.91‐1.04)
  Father education level                   0.96 (0.93‐0.99)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}        0.96 (0.91‐1.01)                                               0.95 (0.90‐1.00)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}
  Mother education level                   1.00 (0.96‐1.05)                                                 1.00 (0.93‐1.07)                                               1.02 (0.96‐1.08)
  Parental support                         1.09 (1.02‐1.16)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}          1.18 (1.07‐1.29)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}      0.99 (0.93‐1.06)
  School subjective social status          0.94 (0.90‐0.99)[\*\*](#osp4389-note-0014){ref-type="fn"}        0.94 (0.88‐1.00)                                               0.94 (0.90‐3.19)[\*](#osp4389-note-0013){ref-type="fn"}

*P* \< .05.

*P* \< .01.

*P* \< .001.

World Health Organization definition of overweight/obesity.

3.1. Overall sample analysis {#osp4389-sec-0016}
----------------------------

The association was more robust for compliance with the physical activity recommendation, with adjusted ORs ranging from 1.90 (95% CI, 1.43‐2.51) for 1 to 2 days to 31.85 (95% CI, 23.40‐43.35) for all 5 days of physical activity outdoor after school (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}). One day or more (ie, from 1‐2 d to all 5 d) of physical activity outdoor was significantly associated with greater odds of compliance with the physical activity recommendation (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}) and lower odds of overweight/obesity (Table [5](#osp4389-tbl-0005){ref-type="table"}). Whereas, 3 days or more (ie 3‐4 d and all 5 d) of physical activity outdoor after school was associated with greater odds of compliance with the screen time recommendation (Table [3](#osp4389-tbl-0003){ref-type="table"}). As shown in Table [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}, univariate analyses showed that one or more days of physical activity outdoor was significantly associated with greater odds of compliance with the sleep recommendation. However, results were no longer significant after adjusting for covariates.

3.2. Sex‐specific analyses {#osp4389-sec-0017}
--------------------------

In both male and female adolescents, sex‐specific analyses showed the following results. First, 1 day or more of physical activity outdoor was significantly associated with greater odds of compliance with the physical activity recommendation (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}). Second, 3 days or more of physical activity outdoor after school was associated with greater odds of compliance with the screen time recommendation in both male and female adolescents (Table [3](#osp4389-tbl-0003){ref-type="table"}). Finally, engaging in physical activity outdoor after school on all 5 days was associated with greater odds of compliance with the sleep duration (Table [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}) and with lower overweight/obesity prevalence (Table [5](#osp4389-tbl-0005){ref-type="table"}).

Significant gender differences were observed in the associations of outdoor physical activity after school with compliance with the physical activity (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}) and the sleep duration (Table [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}) recommendations. After adjusting for covariates, females who performed outdoor physical activity after school on 1 to 2 days had greater odds of compliance with the sleep duration recommendation compared with their male counterparts (Table [2](#osp4389-tbl-0002){ref-type="table"}). With respect to compliance with the sleep duration recommendation, outdoor physical activity after school on all 5 days was associated with greater odds of compliance with the sleep duration recommendation among males (OR = 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01‐2.31), but not females (OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.65‐1.30) (Table [4](#osp4389-tbl-0004){ref-type="table"}). No sex differences were observed in the association between the number of days spent physically active outdoor and adherence to the screen time recommendation.

4. DISCUSSION {#osp4389-sec-0018}
=============

This study investigated the relationships between frequency of outdoor physical activity after school, compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations, and excess weight among adolescents. Collectively, there was a positive gradient between the number of weekdays spent physically active outdoor after school and compliance with the physical activity and screen time recommendations, while a negative gradient with overweight/obesity was observed. We also found that outdoor physical activity after school on all 5 days was associated with greater odds of compliance with the sleep duration recommendation among males, but not females. These findings support the hypothesis that more frequent outdoor physical activity after school is associated with better compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations and healthy weight among adolescents.

The present findings are in line with previous studies that have reported a significant relationship between outdoor time and healthy active living indicators.[7](#osp4389-bib-0007){ref-type="ref"} For example, Schaefer et al[10](#osp4389-bib-0010){ref-type="ref"} found that spending more time outdoors after school was associated with more MVPA, better compliance with the physical activity recommendation, less time in sedentary activities, and higher cardiorespiratory fitness in a sample of 306 Canadian youth aged 9 to 17 years old.[10](#osp4389-bib-0010){ref-type="ref"} Similarly, Larouche et al[8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"} in another Canadian study of 1,159 children aged 7 to 14 years has recently found that children reporting more time outdoors were more active, less sedentary, and less likely to have relationship problems with their peer, relative to those who spent less time outdoors.[8](#osp4389-bib-0008){ref-type="ref"} However, previous studies have mainly focused on time spent outdoor. The present study extends previous research by capturing a specific type of activity youth engage in while outside (ie, outdoor physical activity) and the frequency of such an activity. Results showed that regular physical activity outdoor after school is associated with better compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations (males only) and lower overweight/obesity prevalence among adolescents.

Among the three components of the 24‐hour movement guidelines examined in the present study, frequency of outdoor physical activity was most strongly associated with compliance with the physical activity recommendation. These findings, along with the positive gradient observed between outdoor physical activity and compliance with the physical activity recommendation, provide further support to the affirmation that unstructured outdoor activities after school is a good way to increase children\'s physical activity.[33](#osp4389-bib-0033){ref-type="ref"} With only 23.3% of the respondents in this sample meeting, the current physical activity guidelines of at least 60 minutes of MVPA per day, there is a need for heightened efforts to increase this prevalence. Our findings suggest that outdoor physical activity after school should be encouraged to increase compliance with the physical activity recommendation among adolescents.

In contrast to the findings from the current study indicating that frequency of outdoor physical activity after school is associated with greater odds of compliance with the screen time recommendations, LeBlanc et al[34](#osp4389-bib-0034){ref-type="ref"} found that greater outdoor time was associated with a higher screen time score in a sample of over 5000 children from 12 different countries who participated in the International Study of Childhood Obesity, Lifestyle and the Environment (ISCOLE). The discrepant findings are likely because of the methodological differences, including the age of study participants and the measure used. ISCOLE was conducted among children aged 9 to 11 years. However, the current study encompassed youth aged 11 to 20, and older students were oversampled. The use of different measures for the independent variable (frequency of outdoor physical activity after school vs. outdoor time before school, after school, and on weekends) could also explain the observed differences. School‐aged children and adolescents may have the opportunity to have more screen time during the weekends than on weekdays.[35](#osp4389-bib-0035){ref-type="ref"}, [36](#osp4389-bib-0036){ref-type="ref"} Therefore, future research is desired to examine the behaviours during the week and separately on the weekends and to determine whether regular physical activity outdoor could result in compliance with the screen time recommendation among adolescents.

Research studies examining the relationship between outdoor physical activity and sleep duration among adolescents are very sparse. Our finding that outdoor physical activity is not associated with compliance with the sleep duration recommendation in the total sample is consistent with a recent study by Lin et al.[14](#osp4389-bib-0014){ref-type="ref"} who found that outdoor active play was not associated with sleep duration, chronology, and efficiency in a sample of 433 children aged 10--13 years. Other studies have also found that physical activity is not associated with sleep duration among younger children.[37](#osp4389-bib-0037){ref-type="ref"}, [38](#osp4389-bib-0038){ref-type="ref"}, [39](#osp4389-bib-0039){ref-type="ref"} However, the current study extends these findings by observing an important sex difference in this sample of adolescents. Results showed that outdoor physical activity after school on all 5 days was associated with greater odds of compliance with the sleep duration recommendation among males, but not females. This could be explained by the fact that males are more active in general and they spend more time outside than girls[21](#osp4389-bib-0021){ref-type="ref"} so they may need to sleep more to recover. Outdoor physical activities among females may not be sufficiently intense to have benefits on sleep duration. Regardless, our results provide evidence of possible benefits of outdoor physical activity among adolescents. Future research is needed to replicate and further understand the sex difference between outdoor physical activities and sleep duration among adolescents.

Strengths of this study include the use of a large and representative province‐wide sample of adolescents, the examination of sex‐specific relationships, and the adjustment for important covariates. However, an important limitation of our analysis is that it was based on cross‐sectional data, which precludes causal inferences. Future studies should utilize longitudinal data to better examine directionality and temporality in the findings. In addition, responses were self‐reported, which may have caused some recall and social desirability bias. Future studies should rely on objective measures of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep duration, and adiposity. Another limitation is related to the fact that the survey assessed only weekday outdoor physical activity.

In conclusion, our results show that regular physical activity outdoor after school is associated with better compliance with the physical activity, screen time, and sleep duration recommendations (males only) and lower overweight/obesity prevalence among adolescents. These findings support previous observations and suggest that outdoor physical activity after school could be a good behavioural target to increase compliance with the physical activity and screen time recommendations and possibly tackle excess weight among adolescents. However, future research using longitudinal design is needed to confirm temporality and clarify the observed sex differences.

FUNDING {#osp4389-sec-0020}
=======

The Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a Centre for Addiction and Mental Health initiative, was funded in part through ongoing support from the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long‐Term Care, as well as targeted funding from several provincial agencies. The funders had no involvement in study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing the report; or the decision to submit the report for publication.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT {#osp4389-sec-0021}
==============================

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

We thank the students for participating in this study. H.S.K. designed the study, analysed the data, and wrote the manuscript. I.C., H.A.H., and J.P.C. designed the study and were involved in writing and revising the manuscript. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.