Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32742780›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2020

School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools.

Maryam Kazemitabar, Ali Moghadamzadeh, Mojtaba Habibi, Rezvan Hakimzadeh, Danilo Garcia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Health Risks Management Program in Schools: An Operational Study in Türkiye.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maryam KazemitabarDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Ali MoghadamzadehDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Mojtaba HabibiHealth Promotion Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Rezvan HakimzadehDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Danilo GarciaDepartment of Behavioral Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
University of Tehran · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRLinköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the school health's assessment tools in primary schools through COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. We examined the studies that have addressed the measurement properties of school-health instruments to give a clear overview of the quality of all available tools measuring school health in primary schools. This systematic review was registered in PROPERO with the Registration ID: CRD42020158158.

methodDatabases of EBSCOhost, PubMed, ProQuest, Wily, PROSPERO, and OpenGrey were systematically searched without any time limitation to find all full-text English journal articles studied at least one of the COSMIN checklist measurement properties of a school-health assessment tool in primary schools. The instruments should be constructed based on a school health model. The eligible studies were assessed by COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist to report their quality of methodology for each measurement property and for the whole study by rating high, moderate or low quality.

resultsAt the final screening just seven studies remained for review. Four studies were tool development, three of them were rated as "adequate" and the other study as "very good"; five studies examined the content validity, three of them were appraised as "very good", and the two remaining as "inadequate". All seven studies measured structural validity, three of them were evaluated as "very good", three other were scored as "adequate", and the last study as "inadequate". All the seven studies investigated the internal consistency, five of them were assessed as "very good", one was rated as "doubtful", and the last one as "inadequate". Just one study examined the cross-cultural validity and was rated as "adequate". Finally, all seven studies measured reliability, two of them were rated as "very good" and the rest five studies were appraised as "doubtful". All rating was based on COSMIN checklist criteria for quality of measurement properties assessment.

conclusionThe number of studies addressing school health assessment tools was very low and therefore not sufficient. Hence, there is a serious need to investigate the psychometric properties of the available instruments measuring school health at primary schools. Moreover, the studies included in the present systematic review did not fulfill all the criteria of the COSMIN checklist for assessing measurement properties. We suggest that future studies consider these criteria for measuring psychometric properties and developing school health assessment tools.

Indexed as

COSMIN risk of bias checklistHealth-promoting schoolsMethodological quality assessmentPsychometric propertiesReliability and validitySchool healthSchool health assessment toolsSchool health in primary schoolsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32742780
PMCPMC7380271
OpenAlexW3045042004

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.