Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31126278›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2019

Process evaluation of a classroom active break (ACTI-BREAK) program for improving academic-related and physical activity outcomes for students in years 3 and 4.

Amanda Watson, Anna Timperio, Helen Brown, Kylie D Hesketh

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Using the R = MCBMC public health · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amanda WatsonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. watson@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9058-3435
Anna TimperioInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Helen BrownInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Kylie D HeskethInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Science, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. kylie.hesketh@deakin.edu.au.
Deakin University · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council FT130100637National Heart Foundation of Australia 100046National Heart Foundation of Australia 100370
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundActive breaks in the classroom have been shown to be effective for increasing children's physical activity, while simultaneously improving classroom behaviour outcomes. However, there is limited evidence on the feasibility and fidelity of these programs outside of the research context. The purpose of this study was to conduct a process evaluation to explore factors associated with feasibility and fidelity of a classroom active break (ACTI-BREAK) program designed to improve classroom behaviour and physical activity outcomes for children in primary (elementary) school Years 3 and 4.

methodsSix schools (3 intervention; 3 control) and 374 children (74% response) were included in the ACTI-BREAK pilot cluster randomised controlled trial. The intervention involved teachers implementing 3 × 5-minute moderate-intensity ACTI-BREAKS into their classroom routines, daily. This study focuses on the responses of students (n = 138) and their teachers (n = 7) who participated in the ACTI-BREAK intervention group. Intervention fidelity was assessed by number of ACTI-BREAKS completed per class per day; minutes spent in moderate-intensity physical activity (accelerometry) per ACTI-BREAK; change in physical activity from baseline to mid- and end- intervention. Intervention feasibility was explored through telephone interviews (teachers), questionnaires and focus groups (students), and teacher observations of acute effects on classroom behaviour. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analyses; acute effects on classroom behaviour and change in physical activity were explored using paired t-tests; questionnaire data were described as frequencies.

resultsTeachers implemented two ACTI-BREAKS/day on average, mostly of light-intensity physical activity. Physical activity increased from baseline to mid-, but not baseline to end-intervention; classroom behaviour improved immediately following ACTI-BREAKS. Barriers to implementation included ability for students to return to task and scheduling. Facilitators included ease of implementation, flexible delivery options and student enjoyment. Students were largely satisfied with the program and enjoyed ACTI-BREAKS that incorporated choice, imagination and challenge but did not enjoy ACTI-BREAKS that evoked silliness or were perceived as too difficult and some did not like doing ACTI-BREAKS in the confined space of their classroom.

conclusionsResults indicated the ACTI-BREAK program was acceptable for students and feasible for teachers, however, some minor modifications in terms of required frequency and intensity could improve fidelity.

trial registrationAustralia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12617000602325 ). Retrospectively registered on 27 April 2017.

Indexed as

ExerciseSchool Health ServicesAccelerometryAustraliaChildCluster AnalysisFeasibility StudiesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMalePilot ProjectsProgram EvaluationRetrospective StudiesStudentsChildrenInterventionPhysical activityPrimary schoolProcess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID31126278
PMCPMC6533703
OpenAlexW2944892964

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.