Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26956383›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2016

Impact of offering cycle training in schools upon cycling behaviour: a natural experimental study.

Anna Goodman, Esther M F van Sluijs, David Ogilvie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Physical activity and social connectedness interventions in outdoor spaces among children and youth: a rapid review.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

3 authors.

Anna GoodmanFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK. anna.goodman@lshtm.ac.uk.
Esther M F van SluijsMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. esther.vansluijs@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk.
David OgilvieMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Box 285, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. david.ogilvie@mrc-epid.cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UP_1001/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/6Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/7Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngland's national cycle training scheme, 'Bikeability', aims to give children in England the confidence to cycle more. There is, however, little evidence on the effectiveness of cycle training in achieving this. We therefore examined whether delivering Bikeability was associated with cycling frequency or with independent cycling.

methodsWe conducted a natural experimental study using information on children aged 10-11 years participating in the nationally-representative Millennium Cohort Study. We identified Cohort participants whose schools had offered Bikeability in 2011-2012 using operational Bikeability delivery data (children in London excluded, as delivery data not available). Our natural experimental design capitalised on the fact that Cohort participants were surveyed at different times during 2012 and were also offered Bikeability at different times during 2012. This allowed us to compare cycling levels between children whose schools delivered Bikeability before their survey interview ('intervention group', N = 2563) and an otherwise comparable group of children whose schools delivered Bikeability later in the year ('control group', N = 773). Parents reported whether their child had completed formal cycle training; their child's cycling frequency; whether their child ever made local cycling trips without an adult; and other child and family factors. We used Poisson regression with robust standard errors to examine whether cycling behaviour differed between the intervention and control groups.

resultsChildren whose school had offered Bikeability were much more likely to have completed cycle training than the control group (68% vs. 28%, p < 0.001). There was, however, no evidence that delivering Bikeability in school was associated with cycling more often (49.0% cycling at least once per week in the intervention group vs. 49.6% in the control group; adjusted risk ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.89, 1.10). There was likewise no evidence of an association with cycling independently (51.5% in the intervention group vs. 50.1% in the control group; adjusted risk ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.89, 1.06).

conclusionsOffering high-quality cycle training free at the point of delivery in English schools encourages children to do cycle training, but we found no evidence of short-term effects on cycling frequency or independent cycling. Future evaluation should investigate longer-term effects on these and other stated Bikeability objectives such as increasing cycling safety.

Indexed as

BicyclingChild BehaviorEducationExerciseSchoolsAdultChildCohort StudiesEnglandFemaleHumansMaleParentsSafetySurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26956383
PMCPMC4784314

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.