Protocol for developing a core outcome set for evaluating school-based physical activity interventions in primary schools

Foley, Kimberley; Venkatraman, Tishya; Ram, Bina; Ells, Louisa; Sluijs, Esther M. F. van; Hargreaves, Dougal; Greaves, Felix; Sharabiani, Mansour Taghavi Azar; Viner, Russell; Bottle, Alex; Saxena, Sonia

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031868

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are two main differences among any of these digital interventions: (1) the level of digital health literacy required to operate or interact with the digital technologies included in the digital intervention, which can be low for noninteractive wearable sensors to high when operating a smartphone app, and (2) the level of engagement and feedback, which can range from a passive use of a website, obtaining reminders via email or SMS to continuous tracing and feedback from smartphone apps or activity trackers. Furthermore, similar to that of nondigital interventions, the development of core physical activity outcome sets is necessary to evaluate digital interventions in different populations [ 70 , 71 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Scoping Review

Santis¹,

Jahnel²,

Matthias³

et al. 2022

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Digital interventions are interventions supported by digital tools or technologies, such as mobile apps, wearables, or web-based software. Digital interventions in the context of public health are specifically designed to promote and improve health. Recent reviews have shown that many digital interventions target physical activity promotion; however, it is unclear how such digital interventions are evaluated. Objective We aimed to investigate evaluation strategies in the context of digital interventions for physical activity promotion using a scoping review of published reviews. We focused on the target (ie, user outcomes or tool performance), methods (ie, tool data or self-reported data), and theoretical frameworks of the evaluation strategies. Methods A protocol for this study was preregistered and published. From among 300 reviews published up to March 19, 2021 in Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases, 40 reviews (1 rapid, 9 scoping, and 30 systematic) were included in this scoping review. Two authors independently performed study selection and data coding. Consensus was reached by discussion. If applicable, data were coded quantitatively into predefined categories or qualitatively using definitions or author statements from the included reviews. Data were analyzed using either descriptive statistics, for quantitative data (relative frequencies out of all studies), or narrative synthesis focusing on common themes, for qualitative data. Results Most reviews that were included in our scoping review were published in the period from 2019 to 2021 and originated from Europe or Australia. Most primary studies cited in the reviews included adult populations in clinical or nonclinical settings, and focused on mobile apps or wearables for physical activity promotion. The evaluation target was a user outcome (efficacy, acceptability, usability, feasibility, or engagement) in 38 of the 40 reviews or tool performance in 24 of the 40 reviews. Evaluation methods relied upon objective tool data (in 35/40 reviews) or other data from self-reports or assessments (in 28/40 reviews). Evaluation frameworks based on behavior change theory, including goal setting, self-monitoring, feedback on behavior, and educational or motivational content, were mentioned in 22 out of 40 reviews. Behavior change theory was included in the development phases of digital interventions according to the findings of 20 out of 22 reviews. Conclusions The evaluation of digital interventions is a high priority according to the reviews included in this scoping review. Evaluations of digital interventions, including mobile apps or wearables for physical activity promotion, typically target user outcomes and rely upon objective tool data. Behavior change theory may provide useful guidance not only for development of digital interventions but also for the evaluation of user outcomes in the context of physical activity promotion. Future research should investigate factors that could improve the efficacy of digital interventions and the standardization of terminology and reporting in this field. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/35332

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Scoping Review

Santis¹,

Jahnel²,

Matthias³

et al. 2022

JMIR Public Health Surveill

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A questionnaire design that measures children’s various levels of physical activity [ 34 ]. A comprehensive evaluation method of physical activity intervention was developed, and standardization of execution, measurement, and evaluation results was provided [ 35 ]. The priorities, appropriateness, and feasibility of effective intervention to prevent childhood obesity were determined, and methods and outcome measures were developed [ 36 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Physical Activity Competence Test Battery and Evaluation Standards for Korean Children

Han¹,

Lee²

2022

Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to develop a comprehensive and systematic method and standard for evaluating children’s physical activity competency as a solution to the problem of increasing child obesity rates due to a decrease in physical activity among children. This study was used a cross-sectional study design. A literature review and Delphi survey were conducted to develop children’s physical activity competency evaluation. The evaluation criteria were presented based on the measurement data of metropolitan area kindergarten students (228 subjects) on the 2016 winter vacation. Items in the evaluation of children’s physical activity competency test battery include health physical strength, basic movement skills, physical activity habits, and physical activity attitudes. Physical fitness for health consisted of muscle strength and endurance (sit-up), flexibility (sit and reach, trunk lift) and body composition (BMI). Fundamental movement skills consisted of mobility (run, hop, jump), stability (static balance, dynamic balance), and control (throw kick). Physical activity habits consisted of the amount of daily steps (steps), exercise time, screen time, and sleep time. Physical activity attitudes consisted of preference, enjoyment, and confidence. The evaluation criteria for child physical activity competency test battery were presented in five stages, divided by age and gender. With the developed evaluation of children’s physical activity competency, the overall level of physical fitness for health, fundamental movement skills, physical activity habits, and physical activity attitudes of kindergarteners in the metropolitan area could be confirmed, and standards were presented.

show abstract

“…The protocol for this work has been published in online supplemental file 1 30 ; it was developed in accordance with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) criteria 29 and prospectively registered accordingly. 31 We used a modified-Delphi method consisting of four stages to develop the COS ( figure 1 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The criteria for outcomes considered most important to measure for each domain after Round 2 were defined a priori, > 70% of all participants rating an outcome ‘critical’ and 15% or less rating it ‘not important’. 30 None of the outcomes were removed between rounds.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants were sent three email reminders to complete Round 1; those who rated all outcomes in Round 1 were invited to complete Round 2. The criteria for outcomes considered most important to measure for each domain after Round 2 were defined a priori, > 70% of all participants rating an outcome ‘critical’ and 15% or less rating it ‘not important’ 30. None of the outcomes were removed between rounds.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developing a core outcome set for physical activity interventions in primary schools: a modified-Delphi study

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo develop a core outcome set (COS) for physical activity interventions in primary schools.DesignModified-Delphi study.SettingThe UK and international.Participants104 participants from four stakeholder groups (educators, public health professionals, health researchers, parents); 16 children (aged 8–9 years) from 1 London primary school.InterventionsPhysical activity interventions.MethodsFour-stage process: (1) outcomes extracted from relevant studies identified from an umbrella review and a focus group; (2) list of outcomes produced and domains established; (3) stakeholders completed a two-round Delphi survey by rating (Round 1) and re-rating (Round 2) each outcome on a nine-point Likert Scale from ‘not important’ to ‘critical’: a>70% participant threshold identified the outcomes rated ‘critical’ to measure, and outcomes important to children were identified through a workshop; and (4) a stakeholder meeting to achieve consensus of the outcomes to include in the COS.ResultsIn total, 74 studies were extracted from 53 reviews. A list of 50 outcomes was produced and three domains were established: ‘physical activity and health’ (16 outcomes), ‘social and emotional health’ (22 outcomes) and ‘educational performance’ (12 outcomes). 104 participants completed survey Round 1; 65 participants completed both rounds. In total, 13 outcomes met the threshold; children identified 8 outcomes. Fourteen outcomes achieved consensus to produce the COS: five outcomes for physical activity and health (diet (varied and balanced), energy, fitness, intensity of physical activity, sleep (number of hours)); seven outcomes for social and emotional health (anxiety, depression, enjoyment, happiness, self-esteem, stress, well-being); and two outcomes for educational performance (concentration, focus).ConclusionsWe have developed the first COS for physical activity interventions in primary schools in consultation with those interested in the development and application of an agreed standardised set of outcomes. Future studies including these outcomes will reduce heterogeneity across studies.Trial registration numberCore Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative registration number 1322; Results.

show abstract

Protocol for developing a core outcome set for evaluating school-based physical activity interventions in primary schools

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Scoping Review

Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Scoping Review

Development of Physical Activity Competence Test Battery and Evaluation Standards for Korean Children

Developing a core outcome set for physical activity interventions in primary schools: a modified-Delphi study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About