ArticleBMJ open2021
Understanding children's perceptions of, and priorities for, healthy neighbourhoods in Aotearoa New Zealand: study protocol for a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combining Outreach and Cross-sectional Research to Gather Children's Soil Values in Aotearoa New Zealand: Protocol for the Mixed Methods Soilsafe Kids Program.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- More-Than-Human: A Cross-Sectional Study Exploring Children's Perceptions of Health and Health-Promoting Neighbourhoods in Aotearoa New Zealand.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNeighbourhood environments can have significant and enduring impacts on children's physical, psychological and social health. Environments can impact health through promoting or hindering physical activity, active travel, and healthy eating in addition to opportunities for social interaction, cognitive development, rest and relaxation. There is a paucity of research that has examined neighbourhood and health priorities, strengths and needs from the perspectives of the community, and even less that has focused on the perspectives of children within communities. The aim of this article is to describe the research protocol for a project to gather child-identified needs and strengths-based solutions for promoting child health and well-being in urban neighbourhood environments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This participatory research project is designed to partner with children in school settings in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland and Ōtepoti Dunedin, Aotearoa New Zealand. An abundant communities approach will be used with children to identify needs and strengths related to neighbourhoods and health. Specific methods including collaborative, creative, play-based methods such as concept-mapping activities and co-creation of final dissemination material on the key messages are described. Plans for researcher reflections, data analysis and dissemination are also detailed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research has been approved by the University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee. Results will be disseminated through child and researcher co-created output, a technical report and academic journal articles. By using evidence-based child-centred approaches to knowledge generation, we anticipate the research will generate new localised insights about children's preferences and needs for healthy neighbourhoods which will be shared with stakeholders in planning and practice. The detailed session protocol including critical researcher reflections is shared in this manuscript for application, development and refinement in future research.
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.