Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35994237›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

The Effectiveness of Physical Literacy Interventions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Johannes Carl, Jaime Barratt, Philipp Wanner, Clemens Töpfer, John Cairney, Klaus Pfeifer

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Physical literacy in older adults: An evolutionary concept analysis.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Johannes CarlDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Gebbertstraße 123b, 91058, Erlangen, Germany. johannes.carl@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7393-0450
Jaime BarrattSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6945-6108
Philipp WannerInstitute of Sports and Sports Sciences, Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 700, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2512-921X
Clemens TöpferInstitute of Sports Science, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Seidelstraße 20, 07749, Jena, Germany.
John CairneySchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2856-3967
Klaus PfeiferDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Gebbertstraße 123b, 91058, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2418-373X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe holistic concept of physical literacy assumes that individuals require adequate cognitive (knowledge and understanding), affective (motivation and confidence), and physical (physical competence) qualities to engage in lifelong physical activity behavior. In recent years, the research field has undergone rapid development and has also yielded an increasing number of interventions that aim to translate the theoretical-philosophical ideas into practical endeavors.

objectiveThe goal of the present pre-registered systematic review was to (a) provide a general overview of evaluation studies on physical literacy interventions and (b) to quantitatively examine the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions.

methodsDrawing on the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched a total of 18 databases for physical literacy interventions. Inclusion criteria were English language, publication by November 2021, and interventions using physical literacy as a theoretical underpinning or evaluation outcome. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed with respect to their basic delivery characteristics, study quality, evaluation approach, and main findings. We additionally ran meta-analyses with all non-randomized and randomized controlled trials to examine and compare the effect of these interventions on five outcome categories: (i) physical competence, (ii) motivation and confidence, (iii) knowledge and understanding, (iv) physical activity behavior, and (v) total physical literacy. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effects on the different categories.

resultsThe screening process with two independent raters yielded 48 eligible interventions reported in 51 eligible articles. Quantitative evaluations most frequently addressed physical competence (72.2%), followed by motivation and confidence (47.2%), physical activity behavior (41.7%), and knowledge and understanding (33.3%). The controlled intervention studies (n = 24) exerted significant effects on all five physical literacy categories. Despite meaningful heterogeneity across the subgroups, the strongest effects were found for physical competence (SMD 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.25), followed by physical literacy aggregate scores (SMD 0.61; 95% CI 0.20-1.01), knowledge and understanding (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.79), physical activity behavior (SMD 0.39; 95% CI 0.23-0.55), and motivation and confidence (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.17-0.44).

conclusionsThe present study empirically demonstrated the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions on several outcomes relevant for promoting physical activity and health. To better inform current practices, future studies are advised to identify those program characteristics that significantly influence the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions. CLINICAL

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020188926.

Indexed as

EatingLiteracyExerciseHumans

Identifiers

PMID35994237
PMCPMC9691485

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.