ArticleJournal of transport & health2021
Implementation of School Remote Drop-off Walking Programs: Results from Qualitative Interviews.
Article in Journal of transport & health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighborhood environment associations with children's active transportation and location-specific physical activity in small town and rural Midwestern settings.Journal of transport & health · 2026Article
- A Tale of Two Cities: Unpacking the Success and Failure of School Street Interventions in Two Canadian Cities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Implementation contextual factors related to community-based active travel to school interventions: a mixed methods interview study.Implementation science communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRemote drop-off programs allow children living "unwalkable" distances from school to walk partway by being dropped off by personal vehicle or bus closer to the school, supporting physical activity and health. However, little evidence exists to guide implementation of such programs.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with key informants from 7 remote drop-off programs to capture descriptive information and qualitative content (
resultsPrograms were from low and high socioeconomic areas (free/reduced price lunch range=4%-92%) and initiated by various champions (school staff=29%, parents=29%, external=42%). 29% of programs incorporated the yellow school bus, 43% involved >100 students, and 71% involved route distances ≥0.5 miles. Twenty themes were identified across 5 implementation science domains (Intervention Characteristics, Inner Setting, Outer Setting, Implementation Process, and Outcomes). Positive outcomes included physical activity, socialization, and improved focus for students; decreased traffic; and positive perceptions of the program by students, parents, and school staff/administrators. Barriers included traffic, weather, and student engagement. Facilitators included having a champion and support from school leaders and the community, conducting process improvements, and incentivizing participation.
conclusionsRemote drop-offs are feasible for supporting active school commuting but underutilized. Promising strategies for supporting uptake and implementation of such programs include communicating benefits, developing champions, engaging school and community leaders, and improving the neighborhood built environment.
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.