Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30342500›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

A retrospective qualitative evaluation of barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a school-based running programme.

Anna E Chalkley, Ash C Routen, Jo P Harris, Lorraine A Cale, Trish Gorely, Lauren B Sherar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Teacher Training and Engagement in Health Promotion Mediates Health Behavior Outcomes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Using the R = MCBMC public health · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Using a multi-stakeholder experience-based design process to co-develop the Creating Active Schools Framework.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna E ChalkleyNational Centre of Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK. a.e.chalkley@lboro.ac.uk.
Ash C RoutenNational Centre of Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Jo P HarrisNational Centre of Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Lorraine A CaleNational Centre of Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Trish GorelyDepartment of Nursing, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, Scotland, UK.
Lauren B SherarNational Centre of Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Loughborough University · GBUniversity of the Highlands and Islands · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing interest in school-based interventions which deliver opportunities for additional physical activity time outside of physical education (PE). A practical and cost-effective approach may be school running programmes. Consequently, many school-based running initiatives are currently being implemented in a grass-roots style movement across the UK. However, research on the implementation of physical activity programmes in schools is notably underdeveloped. Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to better understand the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a running programme, Marathon Kids (MK), within primary schools in England.

methodsTwo sets of semi-structured interviews were conducted, the first with each of the three core members of staff responsible for MK, and the second with each of the MK school staff Champions from 20 primary schools. Also, nine focus groups were conducted with 55 pupils (6-10 years) from five of the schools; all were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsThree themes were identified surrounding the barriers and facilitators to implementation: features of the programme (e.g. ethos and resources), school climate (e.g. culture; whole school engagement; PE and physical activity policies and goals; and physical environment) and programme implementation decisions (e.g. aspirations and planning and sustainability).

conclusionFindings suggest that the barriers and facilitators to implementation are wide-ranging and include programme, organisational and system-level factors. Collectively pointing towards the need for a preparation period before implementation to understand schools' readiness to implement and context-specific factors, both regarding organisational capacity and programme specific capacity.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityProgram DevelopmentRunningChildEnglandFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleQualitative ResearchRetrospective StudiesSchool Health ServicesChildrenImplementationPhysical activityPrimary schoolsQualitative

Identifiers

PMID30342500
PMCPMC6196020
OpenAlexW2896177100

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.