Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25879810›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2015

Increasing children's physical activity through a teaching-assistant led extracurricular intervention: process evaluation of the action 3:30 randomised feasibility trial.

Russell Jago, Simon J Sebire, Ben Davies, Lesley Wood, Kathryn Banfield, Mark J Edwards, Jane E Powell, Alan A Montgomery, Janice L Thompson, Kenneth R Fox

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Russell JagoCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Russ.Jago@bristol.ac.uk.
Simon J SebireCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Simon.Sebire@bristol.ac.uk.
Ben DaviesCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Ben.Davies@bristol.ac.uk.
Lesley WoodCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Lesley.Wood@bristol.ac.uk.
Kathryn BanfieldCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Kate.Banfield@bristol.ac.uk.
Mark J EdwardsCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. M.J.Edwards@bristol.ac.uk.
Jane E PowellDepartment of Health and Social Sciences, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK. jane.powell@uwe.ac.uk.
Alan A MontgomeryNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. Alan.Montgomery@nottingham.ac.uk.
Janice L ThompsonSchool of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. j.thompson.1@bham.ac.uk.
Kenneth R FoxCentre for Exercise, Nutrition & Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. K.R.Fox@bristol.ac.uk.
University of Bristol · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GBUniversity of the West of England · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilBritish Heart FoundationCancer Research UKChief Scientist OfficeDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MR/J000191/1Medical Research Council MR/K00414X/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany children do not engage in recommended levels of physical activity (PA), highlighting the need to find ways to increase children's PA. Process evaluations play an important role in improving the science of randomised controlled trials. We recently reported the results of the Action 3:30 cluster randomised feasibility trial illustrating higher levels of moderate to vigorous intensity PA among boys but not girls. The aim of this paper is to report the process evaluation results including intervention fidelity, implementation, context and how intervention components and trial design could be improved before proceeding to a definitive RCT.

methodsChildren's session enjoyment was assessed every two weeks. Reasons for non-attendance were provided by questionnaire at the end of the intervention. Post intervention interviews were held with participating teaching assistants (TAs) and school key contacts (KCs), and focus groups were conducted with children in all 10 intervention schools. Interviews and focus groups examined how recruitment and session attendance might be improved and established which elements of the programme that were and were not well received.

resultsData indicated good intervention fidelity with TA's adopting enjoyment-focussed teaching styles and the sessions improving children's skills and self-esteem. Several positive aspects of implementation were identified, including high session variety, the opportunity to work in teams, the child-led sessions and the engaging leader style. In terms of context there was evidence that TA's faced difficulties managing challenging behaviour and that further training in this area was needed. TAs and KCs felt that recruitment could be improved by providing taster sessions during PE lessons and clarifying the days that the clubs would run at the point of recruitment. The programme could be improved to enhance interest for girls, by including training for managing disruptive behaviour and making some activities more age-group appropriate.

conclusionsAction 3.30 showed promise but could be improved by ensuring age appropriate activities, providing more appeal to girls and improving recruitment through taster sessions and early establishment of days of the week it is to be offered on.

trial registrationISRCTN58502739.

Indexed as

ExercisePlay and PlaythingsAge FactorsChildFemaleHealth PromotionHumansInterviews as TopicMaleSchoolsSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID25879810
PMCPMC4340639
OpenAlexW1976713309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.