Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39097706›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2024

Remote physical activity intervention to promote physical activity and health in adolescent girls (the HERizon project): a multi-arm, pilot randomised trial.

Emma S Cowley, Paula M Watson, Craig Paterson, Anton J M Wagenmakers, Andrew Thompson, Sarahjane Belton, Dick Thijssen, Lawrence Foweather

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Emma S CowleyResearch Institute of Sport and Exercise Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK. E.S.Cowley@ljmu.ac.uk.
Paula M WatsonResearch Institute of Sport and Exercise Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Craig PatersonPopulation Health Science, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Anton J M WagenmakersResearch Institute of Sport and Exercise Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
Andrew ThompsonWolfson Centre for Personalized Medicine, Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Sarahjane BeltonSchool of Health and Human Performance, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Dick ThijssenRadboud Institute of Health Sciences, Department of Physiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Lawrence FoweatherResearch Institute of Sport and Exercise Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

Marię Sklodowska-Curie COFUND 801604
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngaging in physical activity (PA) during adolescence is beneficial for health and positive development. However, most adolescent girls have low PA levels, and there is a need for interventions outside of school hours. This pilot randomised controlled trial aimed to explore the preliminary effectiveness of three different remote PA interventions in increasing adolescent girls' moderate-to- vigorous PA (MVPA), fitness and psychosocial outcomes.

methodsGirls living in the UK or Ireland, aged between 13 and 16 years old, who wished to increase their activity levels, were eligible for the study. Using a random number generator, participants (n = 153; 14.8y ± 1.4) were randomised into one of three 12-week intervention groups (i) PA programme, (ii) Behaviour change support, or (iii) Combined PA programme and Behaviour change support, or (iv) a Comparison group. Outcome measures included accelerometer and self-reported PA, physical fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness; 20 m shuttle run, muscular endurance; push up, muscular strength; long jump), and psychosocial assessments (perceived competence; body appreciation; self-esteem; behavioural regulation). Linear mixed models were used to analyse differences between each intervention arm and the comparison group immediately postintervention (12 weeks) and at follow up (3-months post-intervention), while adjusting for potential confounders.

resultsParticipation in the PA programme group was associated with higher perceived competence (0.6, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.2), identified regulation (0.7, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.1) and intrinsic motivation (0.9, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.6) at post-intervention. Participation in the Behaviour change group was associated with higher perceived competence at post-intervention (0.6, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.2), and higher push-up scores at the 3-month follow-up (4.0, 95% CI 0.0 to 7.0). Participation in the Combined group was also associated with higher perceived competence at post-intervention (0.8, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.4), and higher push-up scores at the 3-month follow-up (5.0, 95% CI 1.0 to 8.0). No other significant differences were found between the intervention arms and the comparison group.

conclusionResults suggest perceived competence increased across all intervention arms, while the PA programme group enhanced autonomous motivation in the short term. Intervention arms with behaviour change support appear most promising in improving muscular endurance. However, a larger scale trial is needed for a better understanding of between-group differences and the impact of intervention arms on MVPA and fitness, given the small sample size and short-term follow-up.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth PromotionAdolescentFemaleHumansIrelandPhysical FitnessPilot ProjectsUnited KingdomAdolescentsBehaviour changeGirlsIntervention studyPhysical activityRemote

Identifiers

PMID39097706
PMCPMC11297741

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.