Precompetitive anxiety and self-confidence during the 2023 Finnish Padel championship in high level men's players.

The aim of the current study was to assess precompetitive anxiety and self-confidence in high level men's padel players from Finland. Twenty eight men's padel players from the highest category participated in the research (87.5% of the target population). The CSAI-2R (Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 Revised) and STAI-S (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory - State) questionnaires were used and descriptive and inferential analyzes were performed, including the Kruskal Wallis's H and Mann-Whitney's U tests. The results show that seeded players presented lower levels of cognitive anxiety (η2 = 0.111). Moreover, losers of first round presented more state anxiety than winners (η2 = 0.302). Before the first match, state anxiety was higher than prior to the second match (η2 = 0.148). Furthermore, lower ranked players of first round, compared to second, presented more state anxiety and somatic anxiety (η2 = 0.487 and η2 = 0.277, respectively). However, according to the results obtained, self-confidence was not affected by any of the variables analyzed (ranking, seed, result or round). These findings may be of great interest to players, coaches and sports psychologists, as they allow an enhanced comprehension of the player's level of anxiety and self-confidence.

Policy options for obesity in Europe: a comparison of public health specialists with other stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE: To explore policy options that public health specialists (PHS) consider appropriate for combating obesity in Europe, and compare their preferences with those of other stakeholders (non-PHS). DESIGN: Structured interviews using multicriteria mapping, a computer-based, decision-support tool. SETTING: Nine European countries. SUBJECTS: A total of 189 stakeholders. Twenty-seven interviewees were PHS and non-PHS included food, sports and health sectors. MEASUREMENTS: A four-step approach was taken, i.e. selecting options, defining criteria, scoring options quantitatively and weighting the criteria to provide overall rankings of options. Interviews were recorded and transcribed to yield qualitative data. RESULTS: The PHS concur with other stakeholders interviewed, as all emphasised the importance of educational initiatives in combating obesity, followed by policies to improve community sports facilities, introduce mandatory food labelling and controlling food and drink advertising. Further analyses revealed several significant differences. The non-PHS from the private sector ranked institutional reforms favourably; the PHS from non-Mediterranean countries supported the option of medicines to prevent obesity; and those PHS from Mediterranean countries endorsed the use of activity monitoring devices such as pedometers. As far as appraisal criteria were concerned, PHS considered efficacy and the economic impact on the public sector to be the most important. CONCLUSION: There is clear consensus among PHS and other stakeholders concerning the need for a package of policy options, which suggests that European-wide implementation could be successful. However, it would be advisable to avoid more contentious policy options such as taxation until future changes in public opinion.

[Assessment criteria for public policies on obesity: the view of Spanish stakeholders]. / Criterios de valoración de políticas públicas para la obesidad en España según sus actores principales.

AIM: To explore the criteria used to assess public policy initiatives on obesity in Spain by the main stakeholders. METHODS: Multicriteria mapping was performed within the framework of the European PorGrow Project "Policy options for responding to obesity" through a structured interview with 21 stakeholders, who were leaders in the public and private sectors in Spain in the area of food and physical exercise. Qualitative and quantitative information was included in the analysis. The interviewees justified their positions for or against the various policy options with criteria that were weighted by their relative importance and documented with quotations and nuggets from the interviewees' discourse. RESULTS: We identified 93 criteria for policy selection in the 21 interviewees. The most frequent criteria and those perceived as most important were efficacy (n = 18), social benefits (n = 17) and social acceptability (n = 14). The economic impact on individuals and the public sector was not considered important by the interviewees. The economic impact on the commercial sector was not included by any of the participants. The criterion most highly valued by public sector stakeholders was societal benefits while that most valued by private sector stakeholders was efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Spain is in the initial stages of developing public policy on obesity and, as yet, there are no winners and losers among those concerned, which may explain why economic costs seem to be relatively unimportant for the stake-holders, opening a window of opportunity for the development of regulatory policies.