ReviewPilot and feasibility studies2022
Systematic review of the characteristics of school-based feasibility cluster randomised trials of interventions for improving the health of pupils in the UK.
Review in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of resistance training intensity on body composition and nutritional intake among college women with overweight and obesity: a cluster randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2025Trial
- Assessing the feasibility and acceptability of a school-based non-pharmacological intervention for ADHD: the Flex toolkit.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- The feasibility of the COMMUNICATE toolkit to support the communication of physical activity messages with adolescents in Irish schools.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- A co-created randomised controlled feasibility trial of a peer-led complex oral health intervention in UK secondary schools: the RAISED In Yorkshire RiY study protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Sample size calculations for pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial: a review 2010-2020.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Review
- A school-based intervention to improve mental health outcomes for children with cerebral visual impairment (CVI): feasibility cluster randomised trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- How physical activity enhances academic engagement in middle school: a serial mediation model of interpersonal relationships and academic support.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe last 20 years have seen a marked increase in the use of cluster randomised trials (CRTs) in schools to evaluate interventions for improving pupil health outcomes. Schools have limited resources and participating in full-scale trials can be challenging and costly, given their main purpose is education. Feasibility studies can be used to identify challenges with implementing interventions and delivering trials. This systematic review summarises methodological characteristics and objectives of school-based cluster randomised feasibility studies in the United Kingdom (UK).
methodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE from inception to 31 December 2020. Eligible papers were school-based feasibility CRTs that included health outcomes measured on pupils.
resultsOf 3285 articles identified, 24 were included. School-based feasibility CRTs have been increasingly used in the UK since the first publication in 2008. Five (21%) studies provided justification for the use of the CRT design. Three (13%) studies provided details of a formal sample size calculation, with only one of these allowing for clustering. The median (IQR; range) recruited sample size was 7.5 (4.5 to 9; 2 to 37) schools and 274 (179 to 557; 29 to 1567) pupils. The most common feasibility objectives were to estimate the potential effectiveness of the intervention (n = 17; 71%), assess acceptability of the intervention (n = 16; 67%), and estimate the recruitment/retention rates (n = 15; 63%). Only one study was used to assess whether cluster randomisation was appropriate, and none of the studies that randomised clusters before recruiting pupils assessed the possibility of recruitment bias. Besides potential effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and the intra-cluster correlation coefficient, no studies quantified the precision of the feasibility parameter estimates.
conclusionsFeasibility CRTs are increasingly used in schools prior to definitive trials of interventions for improving health in pupils. The average sample size of studies included in this review would be large enough to estimate pupil-level feasibility parameters (e.g., percentage followed up) with reasonable precision. The review highlights the need for clearer sample size justification and better reporting of the precision with which feasibility parameters are estimated. Better use could be made of feasibility CRTs to assess challenges that are specific to the cluster design.
trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42020218993.
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.