Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35913904›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2022

Physical activity promoting teaching practices and children's physical activity within physical education lessons underpinned by motor learning theory (SAMPLE-PE).

Matteo Crotti, James Rudd, Simon Roberts, Katie Fitton Davies, Laura O'Callaghan, Till Utesch, Lawrence Foweather

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Matteo CrottiResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
James RuddNorwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Simon RobertsResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7370-0161
Katie Fitton DaviesResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Laura O'CallaghanResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Till UteschInstitute of Educational Sciences, Department of Pedagogical Assessment and Potential Development, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Lawrence FoweatherResearch Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9851-5421
Liverpool John Moores University · GBNorwegian School of Sport Sciences · NOUniversity of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMovement competence is a key outcome for primary physical education (PE) curricula. As movement development in children emerges through physical activity (PA), it is important to determine the extent of PA promotion within movement competence focused teaching pedagogies. Therefore, this study aimed to assess children's moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and related teaching practices in primary PE within Linear pedagogy and Nonlinear pedagogy and to compare this to current practice within PE delivery in primary schools.

methodsParticipants (n = 162, 53% females, 5-6y) were recruited from 9 primary schools within the SAMPLE-PE cluster randomised controlled trial. Schools were randomly-allocated to one of three conditions: Linear pedagogy, Nonlinear pedagogy, or control. Nonlinear and Linear pedagogy intervention schools received a PE curriculum delivered by trained deliverers over 15 weeks, while control schools followed usual practice. Children's MVPA was measured during 3 PE lessons (44 PE lessons in total) using an ActiGraph GT9X accelerometer worn on their non-dominant wrist. Differences between conditions for children's MVPA were analysed using multilevel model analysis. Negative binomial models were used to analyse teaching practices data.

resultsNo differences were found between Linear pedagogy, Nonlinear pedagogy and the control group for children's MVPA levels during PE. Linear and Nonlinear interventions generally included higher percentages of MVPA promoting teaching practices (e.g., Motor Content) and lower MVPA reducing teaching practices (e.g., Management), compared to the control group. Teaching practices observed in Linear and Nonlinear interventions were in line with the respective pedagogical principles.

conclusionsLinear and Nonlinear pedagogical approaches in PE do not negatively impact MVPA compared to usual practice. Nevertheless, practitioners may need to refine these pedagogical approaches to improve MVPA alongside movement competence.

Indexed as

ExercisePhysical Education and TrainingChildCurriculumFemaleHumansMaleSchools

Identifiers

PMID35913904
PMCPMC9342796
OpenAlexW4289262440

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.