Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34871789›Full record

Trial reportJournal of sport and health science2023

A cluster-randomized trial comparing two SWITCH implementation support strategies for school wellness intervention effectiveness.

Richard R Rosenkranz, Philip M Dixon, David A Dzewaltowski, Gabriella M McLoughlin, Joey A Lee, Senlin Chen, Spyridoula Vazou, Lorraine M Lanningham-Foster, Doug A Gentile, Gregory J Welk

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of sport and health science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. 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

10 authors.

Richard R RosenkranzDepartment of Food, Nutrition, Dietetics & Health, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA. Electronic address: ricardo@ksu.edu.
Philip M DixonDepartment of Statistics, Snedecor Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1210, USA.
David A DzewaltowskiDepartment of Health Promotion, University of Nebraska, Omaha, NE 68198-4365, USA.
Gabriella M McLoughlinImplementation Science Center for Cancer Control and Prevention Research Center, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA; Division of Public Health Sciences (Department of Surgery), Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA.
Joey A LeeDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Colorado Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO 80918, USA.
Senlin ChenDepartment of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-4008, USA.
Spyridoula VazouDepartment of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-4008, USA.
Lorraine M Lanningham-FosterDepartment of Food Science & Human Nutrition, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA.
Doug A GentileDepartment of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1041, USA.
Gregory J WelkDepartment of Kinesiology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-4008, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe School Wellness Integration Targeting Child Health (SWITCH) intervention has demonstrated feasibility as an implementation approach to help schools facilitate changes in students' physical activity (PA), sedentary screen time (SST), and dietary intake (DI). This study evaluated the comparative effectiveness of enhanced (individualized) implementation and standard (group-based) implementation.

methodsTwenty-two Iowa elementary schools participated, with each receiving standardized training (wellness conference and webinars). Schools were matched within region and randomized to receive either individualized or group implementation support. The PA, SST, and DI outcomes of 1097 students were assessed at pre- and post-intervention periods using the Youth Activity Profile. Linear mixed models evaluated differential change in outcomes by condition, for comparative effectiveness, and by gender.

resultsBoth implementation conditions led to significant improvements in PA and SST over time (p < 0.01), but DI did not improve commensurately (p value range: 0.02‒0.05). There were no differential changes between the group and individualized conditions for PA (p = 0.51), SST (p = 0.19), or DI (p = 0.73). There were no differential effects by gender (i.e., non-significant condition-by-gender interactions) for PA (p

conclusionThe observed lack of difference in outcomes suggests that group implementation of SWITCH is equally effective as individualized implementation for building capacity in school wellness programming. Similarly, the lack of interaction by gender suggests that SWITCH can be beneficial for both boys and girls. Additional research is needed to understand the school-level factors that influence implementation (and outcomes) of SWITCH.

Indexed as

Child HealthSchool Health ServicesAdolescentChildExerciseFemaleHumansMaleSchoolsStudentsChildrenImplementation scienceObesity preventionPhysical activitySchool health

Identifiers

PMID34871789
PMCPMC9923427

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.