Outdoor Physical Activity and Youth Mental Well-Being: A Narrative Review with Mountain Biking as an Illustrative Case

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First of all, this manuscript addresses a relevant and timely topic, related to how mountain biking may promote mental well being. 

However, in its current form, the manuscript has significant methodological limitations that substantially weaken its contribution.  

In general, the article is presented as a literature review (that should be included in the tittle), but lacks several essential elements expected in a review paper, including systematic reporting procedures, transparency in study selection or quality assessment of included studies. Is stated to be a narrative review, but some points needs to be addressed.

Moreover, the manuscripts is relatively short (11 pages including references) and lacks key structural elements (Flow diagrams, summary tables, quality assessment, etc)

Given these issues, a substantial revision is required.

Title: 

• You should state that it is a Narrative Review.

Methodology:

• Lack of systematic review. Although the authors mention a "comprehensive literature review", some information and transparency describing the identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion of studies is needed.
• Without this information, it is impossible to evaluate the transparency and reproductibility of the review process.
• A risk of bias assessment is needed, readers cannot determine the strength of the evidence supporting the conclusions. This is particularly important since the manuscripts itself acknowledges that many included studies rely on self reported data and cross sectional design

Results:

• Missing tables or graphics summarizing the included studies. The results sections synthesizes but does not present any structured summary of the included literature.
• The text references individual studies without clearly demonstrating the overall evidence. The section would benefit from discussion of consistency or inconsistency  across studies, and explicit reporting of how many studies support each theme.
• The review initially aims to examine outdoor PA, yet the manuscripts only emphasizes mountain biking programs. However, few studies appear to specifically examine mountain biking interventions. 
• Authors should clarify whether the manuscript aims to review outdoor PA or MTB specifically.

Citation:

• Careful proofreading the references

Other:

* The manuscript is generally readable, but several sections contain informal phrasing or repetitive wording that could be improved for academic clarity.

Addressing these issues would significantly enhance the rigor and contribution of the manuscript.

Author Response

RE: Manuscript ID 4218123: Pedaling Toward Resilience: The Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS

We would like to thank the reviewers for their careful review and helpful comments. Following each comment, we explain what revisions were made to the manuscript to address those concerns, which we believe have improved the clarity and strengthened the manuscript. Changes in the manuscript are indicated using track changes.

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer 1

First of all, this manuscript addresses a relevant and timely topic, related to how mountain biking may promote mental well being. 

However, in its current form, the manuscript has significant methodological limitations that substantially weaken its contribution.  

In general, the article is presented as a literature review (that should be included in the tittle), but lacks several essential elements expected in a review paper, including systematic reporting procedures, transparency in study selection or quality assessment of included studies. Is stated to be a narrative review, but some points needs to be addressed.

Moreover, the manuscripts is relatively short (11 pages including references) and lacks key structural elements (Flow diagrams, summary tables, quality assessment, etc)

Given these issues, a substantial revision is required.

RESPONSE: We thank the reviewer for the constructive feedback. The manuscript has been revised to improve methodological transparency, clarify the scope of the review, and strengthen the presentation of the results.

 

Title: 

• You should state that it is a Narrative Review.

RESPONSE: Thank you for the suggestion. We revised the title to include narrative review.

 

Pedaling Toward Resilience: A Narrative Review on the Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being

 

Methodology:

• Lack of systematic review. Although the authors mention a "comprehensive literature review", some information and transparency describing the identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion of studies is needed.
• Without this information, it is impossible to evaluate the transparency and reproductibility of the review process.
• A risk of bias assessment is needed, readers cannot determine the strength of the evidence supporting the conclusions. This is particularly important since the manuscripts itself acknowledges that many included studies rely on self reported data and cross sectional design

RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestions. We revised the methods section to include these sentences.

 

Materials and Methods Section

A narrative review was conducted to examine the relationship between outdoor physical activity and youth well-being. This review was designed to synthesize existing research on outdoor recreation and youth mental health, with a particular focus on nature-based activities such as mountain biking. This study is a narrative literature review. While systematic search strategies were used to ensure a comprehensive scope, it does not function as a formal systematic review or meta-analysis and therefore does not include a formal risk-of-bias assessment.

 

Data Collection

A literature search was conducted to identify studies examining how outdoor physical activity influences youth mental well-being. Electronic databases including Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, APA PsycARTICLES, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, SocINDEX with Full Text, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), and ERIC were searched. Additional hand searches were conducted using Google Scholar and Web of Science to identify relevant studies that may not have been captured through database searches. In consultation with a research librarian, the following keywords were developed and used in various combinations: youth, youth mental health, outdoors, time outdoors, physical activity, mountain biking, green exercise, green environment, and positive youth development. The search strategy employed Boolean operators (AND, OR) to ensure both breadth and specificity in the results. Specifically, terms for the target population ("youth" OR "adolescent") were combined with the primary intervention ("mountain biking" OR "outdoor physical activity" OR "green exercise") and the identified psychological outcomes ("positive youth development"). This specific combination of keywords was chosen to isolate studies that move beyond general 'green exercise' to specifically intersect high-adventure, high-engagement sports with psychological coping mechanisms and resilience frameworks. The search included peer-reviewed articles (2014–2024) published in English focusing on youth aged 10–18. A total of 34 records were initially identified. Following a title and abstract screening for relevance to youth-specific outcomes and nature-based activity, 17 studies were selected for full-text review and inclusion. The selection focused on studies that provided empirical data, whether qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, on the psychosocial impacts of outdoor engagement. Themes were derived through an iterative process that align with the community-identified priorities established by the CAB, ensuring the results reflect both findings and practical needs. Articles examining multiple racial and ethnic populations were incorporated, and studies conducted outside of the United States were included to provide a broader understanding of outdoor activity and youth mental health outcomes. Articles were excluded if they focused primarily on adults or fell outside the defined publication date range. Three researchers conducted the search and review process in consultation with a research librarian between Fall 2024 and Spring 2025.

 

Results:

• Missing tables or graphics summarizing the included studies. The results sections synthesizes but does not present any structured summary of the included literature.

RESPONSE: We agree that a structured summary enhances the clarity of the evidence. We have added Table 1 to the Results section.

 

• The text references individual studies without clearly demonstrating the overall evidence. The section would benefit from discussion of consistency or inconsistency  across studies, and explicit reporting of how many studies support each theme.

RESPONSE: We have revised the Results and Discussion sections to explicitly report the number of studies supporting each theme. Additionally, we have expanded our discussion on the inconsistencies regarding clinical versus perceived mental health benefits to provide a more balanced view of the current evidence base.

 

Results Section

This review identified 17 studies supporting the benefits of outdoor physical activity, with mountain biking programs serving as a specific example (see Table 1). Guided by the priorities of the CAB and framed through the biopsychosocial model and ecological systems theory, three primary themes emerged regarding youth well-being: resilience (psychological coping and self-efficacy; 6 studies), mood and emotional well-being (affective states and stress reduction; 9 studies), and social well-being (peer relationships and social connectedness; 6 studies). Some studies addressed outcomes across multiple themes, therefore, the sum of studies per theme exceeds the total of 17 reviewed.

 

Discussion Section

The findings from this literature review suggest outdoor physical activity may support several dimensions of youth well-being, particularly resilience, mood regulation, and social connectedness. While there is substantial evidence supporting the link between physical activity and mental well-being, research findings are not uniform. For example, some studies indicate that regular engagement in physical activity reduces social anxiety and strengthens self-esteem [14], whereas other studies found no significant relationship between physical activity and the reduction of clinical mental health disorder symptoms [25]. Despite these discrepancies, longitudinal data suggest that high levels of physical activity in early adolescence are associated with lower emotional distress in later years [14,23]. This supports the hypothesis that physical activity may function as a protective factor against long-term mental health challenges, potentially due to its role in enhancing neuroplasticity and increasing serotonin and endorphin release [26-28]. However, findings regarding these associations should be interpreted as correlations; current data does not support a causal claim that mountain biking “improves” clinical outcomes.

 

• The review initially aims to examine outdoor PA, yet the manuscripts only emphasizes mountain biking programs. However, few studies appear to specifically examine mountain biking interventions. 
• Authors should clarify whether the manuscript aims to review outdoor PA or MTB specifically.

RESPONSE: We have clarified the manuscript’s focus in the Introduction and Results sections. The review aims to examine outdoor physical activity (PA) broadly, while positioning mountain biking (MTB) as a primary illustrative example of how these activities foster resilience in youth.

 

Purpose of Study Section

While the broad benefits of outdoor physical activity are well-documented, there is an increasing need to align research with the practical expansion of community-based sports programs. This review was informed by a community-based initiative that prioritizes outdoor recreation, specifically mountain biking, as a strategy for supporting youth development. In the literature on youth outdoor recreation, many studies do not measure clinical mental health disorders directly but instead examine related psychosocial outcomes. Using the aforementioned frameworks, they provide the lens through which the following literature is synthesized: the biopsychosocial model informs our analysis of individual mood and resilience, whereas the ecological systems theory guides our understanding of social well-being and community-based implications. This study examines how outdoor physical activity supports youth resilience, mood and well-being, and social connectedness, using mountain biking as an example. This analysis contributes to the growing body of research examining nature-based interventions as accessible strategies for supporting youth well-being.

Results Section

This review identified 17 studies supporting the benefits of outdoor physical activity, with mountain biking programs serving as a specific example (see Table 1). Guided by the priorities of the CAB and framed through the biopsychosocial model and ecological systems theory, three primary themes emerged regarding youth well-being: resilience (psychological coping and self-efficacy; 6 studies), mood and emotional well-being (affective states and stress reduction; 9 studies), and social well-being (peer relationships and social connectedness; 6 studies). Some studies addressed outcomes across multiple themes, therefore, the sum of studies per theme exceeds the total of 17 reviewed.

 

Citation:

• Careful proofreading the references

RESPONSE: We appreciate the attention to detail. The reference list has been revised to meet the style guide as required by the journal.

 

Other:

* The manuscript is generally readable, but several sections contain informal phrasing or repetitive wording that could be improved for academic clarity.

Addressing these issues would significantly enhance the rigor and contribution of the manuscript.

RESPONSE: We revised the manuscript to address the comments and have incorporated the suggestions throughout the text. Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and attention to detail.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear,

Im going to do some advices for improve

The citation format used in the manuscript is inconsistent throughout the text. On one hand, it uses the citation format “George Engel (1977)” and on the other hand, the format “[2]”. The entire document should be reviewed and restructured to conform to the journal's guidelines and the correct format for readability. It is observed that the year is referenced in citations to the author, but this should not be the case; it should be, for example, “George Engel [6]”.
In the introduction, several statements are identified that should be cited according to literature references. Among these, for example:
“In the United States, rates of youth anxiety, depression, and emotional distress have also increased in recent years.” (Pp. 40-41)
“These trends are particularly concerning because adolescence represents a critical period of psychological and emotional development, during which unresolved mental health challenges may have long-term consequences extending into adulthood.” (Pp. 42-44)
“Physical activity has been increasingly recognized as an important protective factor for youth mental health, offering both physiological and psychosocial benefits that may support emotional well-being during adolescence.” (Pp. 44-47)
On the other hand, both the introduction and the statement of the objective are not sufficiently specific. There is an emphasis on mountain biking and resilience, but then a much broader spectrum is proposed, encompassing outdoor physical activities and the mental health of young people. This should be reformulated and presented much more clearly.
What are the aspects that support developing this review? Are there related previous reviews? It would be interesting to present these aspects in the introduction. The Community Advisory Board could also be contextualized in the introduction, specifically regarding government programs that support and promote these types of practices, thus justifying and aligning its development.
Regarding data collection, it is presented in a very ambiguous way. Despite being a comprehensive review, more detailed information could be provided to improve its reproducibility and generalizability. Furthermore, the keywords used should be explained, including how they were searched in each database. Also, how do these keywords demonstrate the focus on mountain biking and resilience? It is also unclear how many studies were included in the review.
The line spacing is modified starting in the results section. This needs to be reviewed.
The description of the results is developed without a basis that allows identification of the research on which its development is based. It should indicate which studies have been included in the review and, if possible, include a summary table that synthesizes these studies. The discussion does not sufficiently reflect the theoretical framework on which the work is based, as stated in the introduction.
It is suggested that a section of practical recommendations be included.
Generally speaking, this work lacks a sufficiently clear narrative thread. The methods section lacks information that is crucial for the development of the study in subsequent sections.

Author Response

RE: Manuscript ID 4218123: Pedaling Toward Resilience: The Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS

We would like to thank the reviewers for their careful review and helpful comments. Following each comment, we explain what revisions were made to the manuscript to address those concerns, which we believe have improved the clarity and strengthened the manuscript. Changes in the manuscript are indicated using track changes.

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer 2

Dear,

Im going to do some advices for improve

The citation format used in the manuscript is inconsistent throughout the text. On one hand, it uses the citation format “George Engel (1977)” and on the other hand, the format “[2]”. The entire document should be reviewed and restructured to conform to the journal's guidelines and the correct format for readability. It is observed that the year is referenced in citations to the author, but this should not be the case; it should be, for example, “George Engel [6]”.

RESPONSE: We appreciate the attention to detail and revised the manuscript to address the comments and suggestions throughout the text.

 

To understand the complex relationship between physical activity, well-being, and youth development, this study draws upon two key theoretical frameworks: The biopsychosocial model and the ecological systems theory. The biopsychosocial model is uniquely suited for this review as it accounts for the multifaceted nature of youth development [11]. In the context of outdoor recreation, the biological component involves the physiological response to exercise and nature immersion (e.g., cortisol reduction). The psychological component addresses the individual’s internal experience of 'flow' and self-efficacy gained through mastering technical biking skills. Finally, the social component recognizes the peer and community networks formed through group-based sport participation. Together, these factors interact to foster a more resilient psychological profile than sedentary or solo activities might provide [11]. Furthermore, the ecological systems theory provides the structure for understanding how environmental contexts influence resilience [12]. For example, mountain biking programs serve as a vital microsystem, a setting where youth experience direct social interactions and skill development. This review also considers the macrosystem, exploring how broader cultural shifts and initiatives influence the availability and social acceptance of outdoor interventions. By examining these overlapping systems, the review identifies how outdoor activity acts as a protective buffer across multiple levels of a young person’s environment.

In the introduction, several statements are identified that should be cited according to literature references. Among these, for example:
“In the United States, rates of youth anxiety, depression, and emotional distress have also increased in recent years.” (Pp. 40-41)
“These trends are particularly concerning because adolescence represents a critical period of psychological and emotional development, during which unresolved mental health challenges may have long-term consequences extending into adulthood.” (Pp. 42-44)
“Physical activity has been increasingly recognized as an important protective factor for youth mental health, offering both physiological and psychosocial benefits that may support emotional well-being during adolescence.” (Pp. 44-47)

RESPONSE: Thank you for your attention to detail. We included citations.

 

In the United States, rates of youth anxiety, depression, and emotional distress have also increased in recent years [2].

 

These trends are particularly concerning because adolescence represents a critical period of psychological and emotional development, during which unresolved mental health challenges may have long-term consequences extending into adulthood [3].

 

Physical activity has been increasingly recognized as an important protective factor for youth mental health, offering both physiological and psychosocial benefits that may support emotional well-being during adolescence [4].

On the other hand, both the introduction and the statement of the objective are not sufficiently specific. There is an emphasis on mountain biking and resilience, but then a much broader spectrum is proposed, encompassing outdoor physical activities and the mental health of young people. This should be reformulated and presented much more clearly.

RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestion. We revised the purpose of study section for clarity.

 

While the broad benefits of outdoor physical activity are well-documented, there is an increasing need to align research with the practical expansion of community-based sports programs. This review was informed by a community-based initiative that prioritizes outdoor recreation, specifically mountain biking, as a strategy for supporting youth development. In the literature on youth outdoor recreation, many studies do not measure clinical mental health disorders directly but instead examine related psychosocial outcomes. Using the aforementioned frameworks, they provide the lens through which the following literature is synthesized: the biopsychosocial model informs our analysis of individual mood and resilience, whereas the ecological systems theory guides our understanding of social well-being and community-based implications. This study examines how outdoor physical activity supports youth resilience, mood and well-being, and social connectedness, using mountain biking as an example. This analysis contributes to the growing body of research examining nature-based interventions as accessible strategies for supporting youth well-being.

What are the aspects that support developing this review? Are there related previous reviews? It would be interesting to present these aspects in the introduction. The Community Advisory Board could also be contextualized in the introduction, specifically regarding government programs that support and promote these types of practices, thus justifying and aligning its development.

RESPONSE: Thank you for your thorough review and questions. We added a few sentences throughout the manuscript to assist with the development of this study.

 

Introduction Section

Previous reviews have examined the relationship between physical activity and youth mental health; however, fewer studies have focused specifically on outdoor recreation or high-engagement activities such as mountain biking.

 

Methods Section

The CAB provided context on mountain biking programs in the Southwest and assisted with aligning the research agenda with community-identified priorities.

 

Themes were derived through an iterative process that align with the community-identified priorities established by the CAB, ensuring the results reflect both findings and practical needs.

Results Section

This review identified 17 studies supporting the benefits of outdoor physical activity, with mountain biking programs serving as a specific example (see Table 1). Guided by the priorities of the CAB and framed through the biopsychosocial model and ecological systems theory, three primary themes emerged regarding youth well-being: resilience (psychological coping and self-efficacy; 6 studies), mood and emotional well-being (affective states and stress reduction; 9 studies), and social well-being (peer relationships and social connectedness; 6 studies). Some studies addressed outcomes across multiple themes, therefore, the sum of studies per theme exceeds the total of 17 reviewed.

Regarding data collection, it is presented in a very ambiguous way. Despite being a comprehensive review, more detailed information could be provided to improve its reproducibility and generalizability. Furthermore, the keywords used should be explained, including how they were searched in each database. Also, how do these keywords demonstrate the focus on mountain biking and resilience? It is also unclear how many studies were included in the review.

RESPONSE: We have significantly expanded the data collection section to improve the reproducibility of our search. We now explicitly detail the Boolean search logic used to combine population, intervention, and outcome terms. Furthermore, we have added a justification for our keyword selection, explaining how these specific terms were utilized to isolate the intersection of high-engagement outdoor sports and psychological resilience.

 

Data Collection

A literature search was conducted to identify studies examining how outdoor physical activity influences youth mental well-being. Electronic databases including Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, APA PsycARTICLES, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, SocINDEX with Full Text, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), and ERIC were searched. Additional hand searches were conducted using Google Scholar and Web of Science to identify relevant studies that may not have been captured through database searches. In consultation with a research librarian, the following keywords were developed and used in various combinations: youth, youth mental health, outdoors, time outdoors, physical activity, mountain biking, green exercise, green environment, and positive youth development. The search strategy employed Boolean operators (AND, OR) to ensure both breadth and specificity in the results. Specifically, terms for the target population ("youth" OR "adolescent") were combined with the primary intervention ("mountain biking" OR "outdoor physical activity" OR "green exercise") and the identified psychological outcomes ("positive youth development"). This specific combination of keywords was chosen to isolate studies that move beyond general 'green exercise' to specifically intersect high-adventure, high-engagement sports with psychological coping mechanisms and resilience frameworks. The search included peer-reviewed articles (2014–2024) published in English focusing on youth aged 10–18. A total of 34 records were initially identified. Following a title and abstract screening for relevance to youth-specific outcomes and nature-based activity, 17 studies were selected for full-text review and inclusion. The selection focused on studies that provided empirical data, whether qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, on the psychosocial impacts of outdoor engagement. Themes were derived through an iterative process that align with the community-identified priorities established by the CAB, ensuring the results reflect both findings and practical needs. Articles examining multiple racial and ethnic populations were incorporated, and studies conducted outside of the United States were included to provide a broader understanding of outdoor activity and youth mental health outcomes. Articles were excluded if they focused primarily on adults or fell outside the defined publication date range. Three researchers conducted the search and review process in consultation with a research librarian between Fall 2024 and Spring 2025.

The line spacing is modified starting in the results section. This needs to be reviewed.

RESPONSE: We appreciate the attention to detail. We revised the manuscript to ensure spacing is consistent throughout the entire document.

The description of the results is developed without a basis that allows identification of the research on which its development is based. It should indicate which studies have been included in the review and, if possible, include a summary table that synthesizes these studies.

RESPONSE: Thank you for the suggestion. We included a table to explain this with more detail. Please refer to Table 1.

 

The discussion does not sufficiently reflect the theoretical framework on which the work is based, as stated in the introduction.

RESPONSE: We agree and have included a paragraph in the discussion section linking the study to the theoretical framework discussed in the introduction section.

 

The findings of this review align closely with the biopsychosocial model and ecological systems theory, providing a theoretical basis for how outdoor physical activity influences youth development. From a biopsychosocial perspective, the physical exertion inherent in mountain biking triggers biological responses, such as the release of neurotransmitters like dopamine and endorphins, which directly impact mood and stress. Simultaneously, the psychological 'flow' state achieved during technical riding enhances self-efficacy, while the social nature of group rides provides the community support necessary for emotional resilience. Furthermore, applying ecological systems theory, mountain biking programs function at the microsystem providing a structured space to build peer relationships and adult mentorship outside of school or home settings. When these programs are supported by state-level advocacy and government funding, they strengthen the macrosystem by shifting cultural and policy-level perspectives toward nature-based health interventions. By addressing youth well-being across these multiple ecological systems, outdoor recreation can serve as a protective factor against developmental risks.

It is suggested that a section of practical recommendations be included.

RESPONSE: Thank you for the suggestion. We added practical recommendations to the implications for practice and future research section.

 

These findings suggest that schools, community organizations, and youth development programs may consider integrating structured outdoor recreation opportunities as complementary strategies to support youth well-being. High-engagement activities such as mountain biking programs may provide accessible opportunities for physical activity, peer connection, and skill-building that contribute to resilience and emotional well-being, particularly for youth who may face barriers to traditional mental health services.

Generally speaking, this work lacks a sufficiently clear narrative thread. The methods section lacks information that is crucial for the development of the study in subsequent sections.

RESPONSE: We appreciate your thoughtful review and critical feedback. We revised the methods section to enhance the narrative thread.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript addresses an important and timely topic, and the applied focus particularly the integration of a Community Advisory Board is a clear strength. The paper offers a useful synthesis of literature suggesting that outdoor physical activity may support resilience, mood, and social connectedness in youth, and it has clear potential to inform community-based practice. 
However, several issues need addressing to strengthen the manuscript.
First, the claims made throughout the paper are stronger than the methodology can support. The review is explicitly described as a narrative review without formal systematic procedures or quality appraisal. Given this, the language used, especially in the Discussion and Conclusions should be more cautious. Statements implying that mountain biking or outdoor activity “improves” mental health should be reframed to reflect associations rather than causal effects.
Second, there is a mismatch between the stated focus on mountain biking and the evidence presented. Much of the literature reviewed relates to outdoor activity or green exercise broadly, with relatively limited direct evidence on mountain biking specifically. As such, either the paper should more clearly position mountain biking as an illustrative example within a broader evidence base, or the claims specific to mountain biking should be moderated.
Third, the review lacks sufficient transparency in how the literature was identified and synthesised. While databases, keywords, and inclusion criteria are described, the manuscript does not report the number of studies identified, screened, or included, nor how themes were derived. Even for a narrative review, readers need a clearer sense of the scope and selection of the evidence base.
Fourth, there are conceptual clarity issues. The manuscript sometimes conflates mental health, mental health symptoms, mood, and well-being. The section labelled “Mental Health” primarily discusses stress and mood, and this should be aligned more clearly with the stated thematic structure (resilience, mood, social well-being). Greater precision in terminology would improve the conceptual strength of the paper.
Fifth, there are referencing and formatting errors that need correction. There appears to be at least one mismatch between in-text citations and the reference list, and at least one instance where references are merged or incorrectly formatted. These issues are particularly important in a review paper.
Finally, the Discussion and Implications sections should better reflect the stated limitations. The paper acknowledges reliance on self-report data, cross-sectional designs, and a lack of longitudinal evidence, yet still moves toward relatively strong applied recommendations. These sections would benefit from a more balanced interpretation that aligns claims with the strength of the evidence.
Overall, this is a promising manuscript with clear applied relevance. With greater methodological transparency, improved conceptual clarity, and more cautious interpretation of findings, it could make a useful contribution.

Author Response

RE: Manuscript ID 4218123: Pedaling Toward Resilience: The Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being 

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS

We would like to thank the reviewers for their careful review and helpful comments. Following each comment, we explain what revisions were made to the manuscript to address those concerns, which we believe have improved the clarity and strengthened the manuscript. Changes in the manuscript are indicated using track changes.

 

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer 3

This manuscript addresses an important and timely topic, and the applied focus particularly the integration of a Community Advisory Board is a clear strength. The paper offers a useful synthesis of literature suggesting that outdoor physical activity may support resilience, mood, and social connectedness in youth, and it has clear potential to inform community-based practice. 
RESPONSE: Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and attention to detail. We revised the manuscript to address the comments and have incorporated the suggestions throughout the text.

 

However, several issues need addressing to strengthen the manuscript.
First, the claims made throughout the paper are stronger than the methodology can support. The review is explicitly described as a narrative review without formal systematic procedures or quality appraisal. Given this, the language used, especially in the Discussion and Conclusions should be more cautious. Statements implying that mountain biking or outdoor activity “improves” mental health should be reframed to reflect associations rather than causal effects.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestion and feedback. We revised the language in the discussion and conclusion sections to be more cautious.

 

Second, there is a mismatch between the stated focus on mountain biking and the evidence presented. Much of the literature reviewed relates to outdoor activity or green exercise broadly, with relatively limited direct evidence on mountain biking specifically. As such, either the paper should more clearly position mountain biking as an illustrative example within a broader evidence base, or the claims specific to mountain biking should be moderated.
RESPONSE: We revised the theoretical frameworks section to clarify and strengthen rationale for how the models align with the results of the study.

 

To understand the complex relationship between physical activity, well-being, and youth development, this study draws upon two key theoretical frameworks: The biopsychosocial model and the ecological systems theory. The biopsychosocial model is uniquely suited for this review as it accounts for the multifaceted nature of youth development [11]. In the context of outdoor recreation, the biological component involves the physiological response to exercise and nature immersion (e.g., cortisol reduction). The psychological component addresses the individual’s internal experience of 'flow' and self-efficacy gained through mastering technical biking skills. Finally, the social component recognizes the peer and community networks formed through group-based sport participation. Together, these factors interact to foster a more resilient psychological profile than sedentary or solo activities might provide [11]. Furthermore, the ecological systems theory provides the structure for understanding how environmental contexts influence resilience [12]. For example, mountain biking programs serve as a vital microsystem, a setting where youth experience direct social interactions and skill development. This review also considers the macrosystem, exploring how broader cultural shifts and initiatives influence the availability and social acceptance of outdoor interventions. By examining these overlapping systems, the review identifies how outdoor activity acts as a protective buffer across multiple levels of a young person’s environment.

 

Third, the review lacks sufficient transparency in how the literature was identified and synthesised. While databases, keywords, and inclusion criteria are described, the manuscript does not report the number of studies identified, screened, or included, nor how themes were derived. Even for a narrative review, readers need a clearer sense of the scope and selection of the evidence base.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the attention to detail. The methods section, specifically the data collection section, was revised to include screening and inclusion details.

 

Data Collection

A literature search was conducted to identify studies examining how outdoor physical activity influences youth mental well-being. Electronic databases including Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, APA PsycARTICLES, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, SocINDEX with Full Text, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), and ERIC were searched. Additional hand searches were conducted using Google Scholar and Web of Science to identify relevant studies that may not have been captured through database searches. In consultation with a research librarian, the following keywords were developed and used in various combinations: youth, youth mental health, outdoors, time outdoors, physical activity, mountain biking, green exercise, green environment, and positive youth development. The search strategy employed Boolean operators (AND, OR) to ensure both breadth and specificity in the results. Specifically, terms for the target population ("youth" OR "adolescent") were combined with the primary intervention ("mountain biking" OR "outdoor physical activity" OR "green exercise") and the identified psychological outcomes ("positive youth development"). This specific combination of keywords was chosen to isolate studies that move beyond general 'green exercise' to specifically intersect high-adventure, high-engagement sports with psychological coping mechanisms and resilience frameworks. The search included peer-reviewed articles (2014–2024) published in English focusing on youth aged 10–18. A total of 34 records were initially identified. Following a title and abstract screening for relevance to youth-specific outcomes and nature-based activity, 17 studies were selected for full-text review and inclusion. The selection focused on studies that provided empirical data, whether qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, on the psychosocial impacts of outdoor engagement. Themes were derived through an iterative process that align with the community-identified priorities established by the CAB, ensuring the results reflect both findings and practical needs. Articles examining multiple racial and ethnic populations were incorporated, and studies conducted outside of the United States were included to provide a broader understanding of outdoor activity and youth mental health outcomes. Articles were excluded if they focused primarily on adults or fell outside the defined publication date range. Three researchers conducted the search and review process in consultation with a research librarian between Fall 2024 and Spring 2025.

 

Fourth, there are conceptual clarity issues. The manuscript sometimes conflates mental health, mental health symptoms, mood, and well-being. The section labelled “Mental Health” primarily discusses stress and mood, and this should be aligned more clearly with the stated thematic structure (resilience, mood, social well-being). Greater precision in terminology would improve the conceptual strength of the paper.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the attention to detail. We revised the manuscript for clarity and consistency in terminology.

 

Purpose of Study Section

In the literature on youth outdoor recreation, many studies do not measure clinical mental health disorders directly but instead examine related psychosocial outcomes.

 

Mood and Emotional Well-Being Section

In this review, mood and emotional well-being refer to short-term emotional states, such as stress reduction, feelings of calm, or enjoyment associated with participation in outdoor activity. These outcomes differ from clinical mental health diagnoses or long-term psychiatric conditions.

 

Fifth, there are referencing and formatting errors that need correction. There appears to be at least one mismatch between in-text citations and the reference list, and at least one instance where references are merged or incorrectly formatted. These issues are particularly important in a review paper.
RESPONSE: Again, thank you for the attention to detail. The reference list has been revised to ensure all citations in-text and in the Ference list match and to meet the style guide as required by the journal.

 

Finally, the Discussion and Implications sections should better reflect the stated limitations. The paper acknowledges reliance on self-report data, cross-sectional designs, and a lack of longitudinal evidence, yet still moves toward relatively strong applied recommendations. These sections would benefit from a more balanced interpretation that aligns claims with the strength of the evidence.
RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestions. We revised the discussion section to incorporate this feedback.

 

Overall, this is a promising manuscript with clear applied relevance. With greater methodological transparency, improved conceptual clarity, and more cautious interpretation of findings, it could make a useful contribution.

RESPONSE: We thank the reviewer for the constructive feedback. The manuscript has been revised to improve methodological transparency, clarify the scope of the review, and strengthen the presentation of the results. Thank you for the positive feedback.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have successfully tackled the primary issues highlighted in the first review, resulting in significant enhancements in methodological transparency, conceptual understanding, and overall scholarly integrity. 

The updated manuscript distinctly classifies itself as a narrative review and features a significantly improved Materials and Methods section, offering sufficient information about the literature search strategy, screening procedures, and criteria for inclusion. Moreover, the discussion section has been refined by correctly recognizing inconsistencies present in the literature and steering clear of overstated causal claims. 

The revisions have greatly strengthened the manuscript's clarity, unity, and academic value. At this point, the manuscript is ready for publication.

Author Response

RE: Manuscript ID 4218123: Pedaling Toward Resilience: The Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS

We would like to thank the reviewers for their careful review and helpful comments. Following each comment, we explain what revisions were made to the manuscript to address those concerns, which we believe have improved the clarity and strengthened the manuscript. Changes in the manuscript are indicated using track changes.

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

Reviewer 1

The authors have successfully tackled the primary issues highlighted in the first review, resulting in significant enhancements in methodological transparency, conceptual understanding, and overall scholarly integrity. 

The updated manuscript distinctly classifies itself as a narrative review and features a significantly improved Materials and Methods section, offering sufficient information about the literature search strategy, screening procedures, and criteria for inclusion. Moreover, the discussion section has been refined by correctly recognizing inconsistencies present in the literature and steering clear of overstated causal claims. 

The revisions have greatly strengthened the manuscript's clarity, unity, and academic value. At this point, the manuscript is ready for publication.

RESPONSE: Thank you for your generous and constructive feedback. We greatly appreciate your recognition of the revisions made to enhance the manuscript’s methodological clarity, conceptual framing, and overall integrity. We are pleased that the manuscript now meets expectations for publication.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This revision is improved and addresses several previous concerns. The manuscript is now more cautious in distinguishing psychosocial well-being from clinical mental health outcomes, and it more clearly acknowledges the limits of causal inference and the narrative review design. These are important improvements.

The main remaining issue is alignment between the stated focus and the actual evidence base. The manuscript continues to foreground mountain biking in the title, rationale, and discussion, but the included literature appears to be primarily about outdoor physical activity more broadly, with only limited mountain biking-specific evidence. Because of this, the paper still risks overstating the specificity of its conclusions. I recommend either reframing the manuscript more explicitly as a review of outdoor physical activity and youth well-being with mountain biking as an illustrative case, or substantially tightening the claims throughout so they do not imply a stronger biking-specific evidence base than is available.

The discussion of mechanisms also remains somewhat too assertive. References to neuroplasticity, neurotransmitter release, flow, and ecological systems are plausible, but they are not directly tested in most of the studies reviewed. These sections should be written more clearly as possible interpretive frameworks rather than established mechanisms demonstrated by the included evidence.

The methods section is clearer than before, but the selection process still needs a little more precision. It would help to specify more clearly how studies were judged relevant, how mountain biking studies were distinguished from broader outdoor activity studies, and how themes were derived from the evidence rather than from community priorities alone. That would strengthen confidence that the synthesis is analytical rather than primarily program-driven.

In summary, the paper has improved meaningfully, but it still needs tighter alignment between evidence, framing, and conclusions.

Author Response

RE: Manuscript ID 4218123: Pedaling Toward Resilience: The Impact of Outdoor Physical Activity on Youth Mental Well-Being

RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS

We would like to thank the reviewers for their careful review and helpful comments. Following each comment, we explain what revisions were made to the manuscript to address those concerns, which we believe have improved the clarity and strengthened the manuscript. Changes in the manuscript are indicated using track changes.

Reviewer(s)' Comments to Author:

This revision is improved and addresses several previous concerns. The manuscript is now more cautious in distinguishing psychosocial well-being from clinical mental health outcomes, and it more clearly acknowledges the limits of causal inference and the narrative review design. These are important improvements.

RESPONSE: Thank you for your thoughtful and constructive feedback. We appreciate your careful attention to the alignment between the manuscript’s framing, evidence base, and conclusions. In response, we have made several revisions to strengthen this alignment and improve overall clarity and rigor.

The main remaining issue is alignment between the stated focus and the actual evidence base. The manuscript continues to foreground mountain biking in the title, rationale, and discussion, but the included literature appears to be primarily about outdoor physical activity more broadly, with only limited mountain biking-specific evidence. Because of this, the paper still risks overstating the specificity of its conclusions. I recommend either reframing the manuscript more explicitly as a review of outdoor physical activity and youth well-being with mountain biking as an illustrative case, or substantially tightening the claims throughout so they do not imply a stronger biking-specific evidence base than is available.

RESPONSE: We appreciate the suggestion. We addressed the concern regarding the emphasis on mountain biking relative to the broader evidence base. We have reframed the manuscript more explicitly as a narrative review of outdoor physical activity and youth well-being, with mountain biking positioned as an illustrative example rather than the primary focus of the evidence. This change is reflected in the title, abstract, and throughout the manuscript, where we have revised language to avoid overstating biking-specific conclusions.

Title: Outdoor Physical Activity and Youth Mental Well-Being: A Narrative Review with Mountain Biking as an Illustrative Case

Abstract: This narrative review synthesizes existing literature on outdoor physical activity and youth well-being, with mountain biking considered as an illustrative example of a high-engagement, nature-based activity. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple academic databases, including Academic Search Complete, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, SocINDEX, ERIC, and additional hand searches in Google Scholar and Web of Science. Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria and were analyzed using an iterative thematic approach. Three primary themes emerged: resilience, mood and emotional well-being, and social connectedness. Across studies, outdoor physical activity was associated with improvements in self-efficacy, stress reduction, and peer relationships. However, most studies examined outdoor activity broadly, with limited evidence specific to mountain biking. While prior literature suggests that biological and psychosocial processes (e.g., engagement with nature, social interaction, and perceived competence) may underlie these associations, these mechanisms were not directly tested in most included studies. Findings should therefore be interpreted as indicative of associations rather than causal effects. Overall, outdoor physical activity represents a promising, accessible approach for supporting youth well-being. Future research should further examine activity-specific impacts, including mountain biking, and prioritize longitudinal and experimental designs to better understand mechanisms and long-term outcomes.

Introduction: This study examines how outdoor physical activity is associated with youth resilience, mood and well-being, and social connectedness, with mountain biking considered as an illustrative example within the broader context of nature-based activity.

Results: This review identified 17 studies supporting the benefits of outdoor physical activity, with mountain biking programs representing a limited but illustrative subset of the literature (see Table 1).

The discussion of mechanisms also remains somewhat too assertive. References to neuroplasticity, neurotransmitter release, flow, and ecological systems are plausible, but they are not directly tested in most of the studies reviewed. These sections should be written more clearly as possible interpretive frameworks rather than established mechanisms demonstrated by the included evidence.

RESPONSE: We revised the discussion of underlying mechanisms to ensure appropriate caution. References to neurobiological and psychosocial processes (e.g., neuroplasticity, neurotransmitter activity, and flow) are now clearly presented as theoretical or interpretive frameworks rather than empirically established mechanisms within the reviewed studies.

Introduction: These benefits have been identified to operate through neurobiological and psychosocial pathways, including potential neurobiological response (e.g., neuroplasticity and neurotransmitter activity), and psychosocial processes such as mastery, autonomy, and social interaction, although these mechanisms are not directly tested in most studies [8].

The methods section is clearer than before, but the selection process still needs a little more precision. It would help to specify more clearly how studies were judged relevant, how mountain biking studies were distinguished from broader outdoor activity studies, and how themes were derived from the evidence rather than from community priorities alone. That would strengthen confidence that the synthesis is analytical rather than primarily program-driven.

RESPONSE: We strengthened the Methods section by providing greater specificity regarding the study selection and synthesis process. We now more clearly define inclusion criteria, distinguish between mountain biking–specific and general outdoor activity studies, and clarify that thematic development was conducted through an iterative analysis of the literature and subsequently refined with input from the Community Advisory Board. We clarified that thematic development was conducted inductively from the literature and subsequently refined with CAB input, rather than derived from community priorities alone.

Studies were considered relevant for inclusion if they (1) focused on youth aged 10–18, (2) examined outdoor or nature-based physical activity, and (3) reported psychosocial or mental health-related outcomes (e.g., resilience, mood, stress, or social well-being).

Studies were classified as mountain biking–specific when mountain biking was the primary activity examined, while all other studies were categorized as general outdoor physical activity. This distinction was used to support interpretation of findings and to avoid overstating activity-specific conclusions.

Themes were developed through an inductive, iterative analysis of the included studies. Initial thematic groupings were identified based on patterns observed across study findings and were subsequently refined in consultation with the CAB to ensure contextual relevance and practical applicability.

In summary, the paper has improved meaningfully, but it still needs tighter alignment between evidence, framing, and conclusions.

RESPONSE: We are grateful for your feedback, which has significantly strengthened the coherence and scholarly rigor of the manuscript. We reviewed the Discussion and Conclusions sections to ensure that all claims are appropriately aligned with the scope and strength of the available evidence. Language has been revised throughout to avoid overgeneralization and to maintain consistency between the evidence base and the manuscript’s framing.

Discussion

Importantly, the evidence synthesized in this review primarily reflects outdoor physical activity broadly, with mountain biking representing a smaller subset of the available literature.  

Proposed explanations in prior literature include neurobiological and psychosocial processes (e.g., neuroplasticity, neurotransmitter activity, and enhanced self-efficacy); however, these mechanisms were not directly tested in most of the studies included in this review and should therefore be interpreted as theoretical rather than empirically established within this evidence base [26-28]. 

Mountain biking may represent a unique form of outdoor recreation that integrates physical exertion, skill development, risk management, and environmental engagement; however, the evidence specific to mountain biking remained limited within the current literature and is best interpreted as illustrative of broader patterns observed in outdoor physical activity research.

From a biopsychosocial perspective, outdoor physical activity may engage biological, psychological, and social processes. For example, physical exertion has been associated with neurotransmitter activity, while participation in structured activities may support self-efficacy and social connection. Within this framework, mountain biking can be understood as one example of an activity that may engage these processes, although these mechanisms were not directly evaluated in the included studies. Simultaneously, the psychological concept of 'flow' experienced during skill-based activities such as technical riding may contribute to perceived self-efficacy, while the social nature of group-based participation may support peer connection and emotional well-being. Furthermore, applying ecological systems theory, mountain biking programs can be conceptualized as operating within the microsystem by providing structured opportunities for peer interaction and adult mentorship outside of school or home settings. When supported by broader policy and community investment, these programs may also reflect influences at the macrosystem level by shaping cultural institutional support for nature-based interventions. Taken together, these frameworks offer a way to interpret how outdoor recreation may contribute to youth well-being across multiple ecological levels, though these pathways should be understood as theoretical rather than empirically established within the reviewed studies.

The limited number of mountain biking–specific studies further restricts the ability to draw activity-specific conclusions, reinforcing the need to interpret findings within the broader context of outdoor physical activity.

Conclusion

Studies examining outdoor physical activity, including a limited number focused on mountain biking programs, suggest that participation in outdoor physical activity can foster these outcomes by promoting responsibility, confidence, and a sense of autonomy among youth participants.

Expanding research in this area, particularly studies that isolate specific activities such as mountain biking, may help clarify activity-specific contributions to youth well-being.