Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34046703›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine - open2021

Assessments Related to the Physical, Affective and Cognitive Domains of Physical Literacy Amongst Children Aged 7-11.9 Years: A Systematic Review.

Cara Shearer, Hannah R Goss, Lynne M Boddy, Zoe R Knowles, Elizabeth J Durden-Myers, Lawrence Foweather

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 92 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Cara Shearer *Physical Activity Exchange, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, 5 Primrose Hill, Liverpool, UK.
Hannah R Goss *Physical Activity Exchange, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, 5 Primrose Hill, Liverpool, UK.
Lynne M BoddyPhysical Activity Exchange, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, 5 Primrose Hill, Liverpool, UK.
Zoe R KnowlesPhysical Activity Exchange, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, 5 Primrose Hill, Liverpool, UK.
Elizabeth J Durden-MyersFaculty of Education, The University of Gloucestershire, Francis Close Hall, Swindon Road, Cheltenham, UK.
Lawrence FoweatherPhysical Activity Exchange, Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, 5 Primrose Hill, Liverpool, UK. l.foweather@ljmu.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9851-5421
Liverpool John Moores University · GBDublin City University · IEUniversity of Gloucestershire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the past decade, there has been increased interest amongst researchers, practitioners and policymakers in physical literacy for children and young people and the assessment of the concept within physical education (PE). This systematic review aimed to identify tools to assess physical literacy and its physical, cognitive and affective domains within children aged 7-11.9 years, and to examine the measurement properties, feasibility and elements of physical literacy assessed within each tool.

methodsSix databases (EBSCO host platform, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Education Research Complete, SPORTDiscus) were searched up to 10th September 2020. Studies were included if they sampled children aged between 7 and 11.9 years, employed field-based assessments of physical literacy and/or related affective, physical or cognitive domains, reported measurement properties (quantitative) or theoretical development (qualitative), and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. The methodological quality and measurement properties of studies and assessment tools were appraised using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments risk of bias checklist. The feasibility of each assessment was considered using a utility matrix and elements of physical literacy element were recorded using a descriptive checklist.

resultsThe search strategy resulted in a total of 11467 initial results. After full text screening, 11 studies (3 assessments) related to explicit physical literacy assessments. Forty-four studies (32 assessments) were relevant to the affective domain, 31 studies (15 assessments) were relevant to the physical domain and 2 studies (2 assessments) were included within the cognitive domain. Methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties within the included studies were mixed. The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy-2 and the Passport For Life had evidence of acceptable measurement properties from studies of very good methodological quality and assessed a wide range of physical literacy elements. Feasibility results indicated that many tools would be suitable for a primary PE setting, though some require a level of expertise to administer and score that would require training.

conclusionsThis review has identified a number of existing assessments that could be useful in a physical literacy assessment approach within PE and provides further information to empower researchers and practitioners to make informed decisions when selecting the most appropriate assessment for their needs, purpose and context. The review indicates that researchers and tool developers should aim to improve the methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties of assessments to better inform the field.

trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42017062217.

Indexed as

AssessmentChildrenPhysical educationPhysical literacySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34046703
PMCPMC8160065
OpenAlexW3164336262

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.