Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36901232›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Enjoyed by Jack but Endured by Jill: An Exploratory Case Study Examining Differences in Adolescent Design Preferences and Perceived Impacts of a Secondary Schoolyard.

Gweneth Leigh, Milica Muminovic, Rachel Davey

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Gweneth LeighHealth Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6430-2516
Milica MuminovicFaculty of Arts and Design, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9586-7309
Rachel DaveyHealth Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6117-2872

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The school grounds provide students opportunities for respite, relaxation and relief from daily stresses during breaks in the school day. However, it is unclear whether secondary schoolyard designs adequately support the diverse and evolving needs of adolescents, particularly at a time when they are experiencing rapid emotional and physical developmental change. To investigate this, quantitative methods were used to explore differences in perceptions of schoolyard attractiveness and restorative quality based on student gender and year level. A school-wide survey was administered to approximately 284 students in years 7 to 10 at a secondary school in Canberra, Australia. Results indicate significant declines in student perceptions of schoolyard attractiveness and restorative quality. Higher ratings of schoolyard likeability, accessibility, personal connection and restorative quality of 'being away' were associated with male students across all year levels. Further work is needed to explore how schoolyard environments can better support the design preferences and well-being needs of older and female students. Such information would help planners, designers and land managers develop schoolyard designs that are more equitable in their benefits to secondary school students of different genders and year levels.

Indexed as

RelaxationStudentsAdolescentAustraliaFemaleHumansMaleSchoolsSurveys and Questionnairesdesignhigh schoolperceptionrestorative environmentschoolyardyouth

Identifiers

PMID36901232
PMCPMC10002286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read9
measurements read2
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.