Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31921478›Full record

ArticleJournal of sport and health science2020

Adolescents' perspectives on a school-based physical activity intervention: A mixed method study.

Stephanie T Jong, Caroline H D Croxson, Cornelia Guell, Emma R Lawlor, Campbell Foubister, Helen E Brown, Emma K Wells, Paul Wilkinson, Anna Vignoles, Esther M F van Sluijs and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of sport and health science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Stephanie T JongMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Caroline H D CroxsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Cornelia GuellEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, TR1 3HD, UK.
Emma R LawlorMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Campbell FoubisterMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Helen E BrownMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Emma K WellsMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Paul WilkinsonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, CB21 5EF, UK.
Anna VignolesFaculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 8PQ, UK.
Esther M F van SluijsMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Kirsten CorderMRC Epidemiology Unit and UKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
University of Cambridge · GBMRC Epidemiology Unit · GBRoyal Cornwall Hospital · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKDepartment of Health PHR/13/90/18Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/5Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/7Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To examine adolescent experiences and perspectives of the GoActive intervention (ISRCTN31583496) using mixed methods process evaluation to determine satisfaction with intervention components and interpret adolescents' experiences of the intervention process in order to provide insights for future intervention design. Methods: Participants ( Results: Effect sizes for quantitative results were small and may not represent substantial between-group differences. Boys ( Conclusion: We interpreted adolescent perspectives of intervention components and implementation to provide insights into future complex interventions aimed at increasing young people's physical activity in school-based settings. The intervention component mentorship was liked in principle, but implementation issues undesirably impacted satisfaction; competition was disliked by girls and shy/inactive students. The results highlight the importance of considering gender differences in preference of competition and extensive mentorship training.

Indexed as

ExercisePersonal SatisfactionPsychology, AdolescentSchoolsAdolescentCompetitive BehaviorFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PromotionHumansInternet UseLeadershipMaleMentoringPleasureRewardAdolescentInterventionMixed methodsPhysical activityProcess evaluation

Identifiers

PMID31921478
PMCPMC6943775
OpenAlexW2949840131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.