Trial reportBMC public health2019
Process evaluation of the school-based Girls Active programme.
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 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Intervention Strategies to Increase Adolescents' Physical Activity and Reduce Sedentary Time in Secondary School Settings, Including Factors Related to Implementation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2024Pooled it
- School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Micro-costing and a cost-consequence analysis of the 'Girls Active' programme: A cluster randomised controlled trial.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Co-creating the COMMUNICATE toolkit to support the communication of physical activity messages with adolescents in schools.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Article
- Increasing adolescents' physical activity levels through a comprehensive school-based physical activity program: study protocol of the cluster randomized controlled trial Active School.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Using the R = MCBMC public health · 2024Article
- Adolescents' experiences of a school-based health promotion intervention in socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged areas in Sweden: a qualitative process evaluation study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Implementing a Digital Depression Prevention Program in Australian Secondary Schools: Cross-Sectional Qualitative Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2023Article
- Feasibility of a peer-led, after-school physical activity intervention for disadvantaged adolescent females during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from the Girls Active Project (GAP).Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- Barriers and facilitators of physical activity in adolescents with intellectual disabilities: An analysis informed by the COM-B model.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2022Article
- Evaluating Digital Program Support for the Physical Activity 4 Everyone (PA4E1) School Program: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2021Article
- Reach, Recruitment, Dose, and Intervention Fidelity of the GoActive School-Based Physical Activity Intervention in the UK: A Mixed-Methods Process Evaluation.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Protocol for a process evaluation of Family Planning Elevated: a statewide initiative to improve contraceptive access in Utah (USA).BMJ open · 2020Article
- 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 · 2020Article
- Pathways to Increasing Adolescent Physical Activity and Wellbeing: A Mediation Analysis of Intervention Components Designed Using a Participatory Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGirls Active is a physical activity programme, delivered in UK secondary schools, with the aim of increasing moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in girls aged 11-14 years. This study presents the process evaluation as part of a 14-month cluster randomised controlled trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Girls Active programme and which showed no difference in the primary outcome (MVPA at 14 months) between intervention and control arms.
methodsQuantitative and qualitative data were collected from intervention schools over the course of the 14 month trial. Feedback forms and attendance records were completed at the end of all teacher and peer leader training and review days. At 7- and 14-months, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the lead Girls Active teacher in all intervention schools (n = 10) and staff from the intervention provider (n = 4) and hub school (n = 1). At 14 months, separate focus groups with peer leaders (n = 8 schools), girls who participated in the evaluation component of the trial (n = 8 schools), and a sample of boys (n = 6 schools) were conducted. All participants in the intervention schools were asked to complete an exit survey at 14 months. Teachers (intervention and control) completed a school environment questionnaire at baseline, 7- and 14-months.
resultsThe Girls Active programme, i.e., the training and resources, appeared to be well received by teachers and pupils. Factors that may have contributed to the lack of effectiveness include: some initial uncertainty by teachers as to what to do following the initial training, a predominant focus on support activities (e.g., gathering opinions) rather than actual physical activity provision, and school-level constraints that impeded implementation.
conclusionsGirls Active and what it was trying to achieve was valued by schools. The programme could be improved by providing greater guidance to teachers throughout, the setting of timelines, and providing formal training to peer leaders.
trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN10688342 . Registered 12 January 2015.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.