Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40108555›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

The process of student engagement in school health promotion: a scoping review.

Julia C Kontak, Caitlyn Macrae, Hilary A T Caldwell, Becky Feicht, Stephanie Heath, Camille L Hancock Friesen, Sara F L Kirk

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Julia C KontakFaculty of Health, Dalhousie University, 5968 College Street, PO Box 15000, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada. Julia.Kontak@dal.ca.
Caitlyn MacraeHealthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, 1318 Robie Street, Halifax, Nova Scota, B3H 3E2, Canada.
Hilary A T CaldwellHealthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, 1318 Robie Street, Halifax, Nova Scota, B3H 3E2, Canada.
Becky FeichtSchool of Health and Human Performance, Dalhousie University, PO Box 15000, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada.
Stephanie HeathResearch Power Inc, 114 Ochterloney St, Dartmouth, NS, B2Y 1C7, Canada.
Camille L Hancock FriesenHealthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, 1318 Robie Street, Halifax, Nova Scota, B3H 3E2, Canada.
Sara F L KirkHealthy Populations Institute, Dalhousie University, 1318 Robie Street, Halifax, Nova Scota, B3H 3E2, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 175916CIHR 460786
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth Promoting Schools (HPS) is a whole school model that strengthens and maintains a healthy school environment. While a key component of HPS is the engagement of students, there is little known about the strategies for, facilitators of, and barriers to, student engagement. The purpose of this scoping review was to summarize and characterize the evidence on the process of student engagement in school health promotion, with a focus on whole school models like HPS.

methodsThis scoping review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guided reporting. Eligibility included sources examining the process of student engagement in school health promotion for children and youth (ages 5-19) in any country, who attended a private or public school. Both published and unpublished sources were included. Databases searched were: CINAHL, ERIC, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Relevant organisational websites and sources identified by experts were also reviewed. Two independent reviewers screened the title, abstract, and full text of the sources. Descriptive analysis was conducted for quantitative data, and content analysis was employed for qualitative data.

results1740 sources were screened, 133 citations were eligible for full text review and a total of 50 sources were included: 38 peer-reviewed publications, 7 grey literature sources, 2 peer-reviewed publications from reference-checking and 3 sources recommended by experts. The majority of articles reported on primary research (n = 34), employed qualitative methods (n = 28) and over half of all sources were published from European institutions/organizations (n = 26). Process strategies for student engagement predominantly related to participatory mechanisms including reflection and visioning, determining priorities and action-oriented learning. A wide range of intersecting facilitators and barriers were identified, with school structures largely acting as a barrier and adult approaches to engagement being a facilitator.

conclusionThis scoping review described the strategies, facilitators and barriers involving the process of student engagement in school health promotion. The results can inform the development and implementation of future student engagement strategies to strengthen school health promotion actions.

Indexed as

Health PromotionSchool Health ServicesStudentsAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolHumansSchoolsYoung AdultHealth promotionParticipatorySchool healthYouth engagement

Identifiers

PMID40108555
PMCPMC11921550

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.