ArticlePloS one2025
Development and validation of a measurement instrument for student assessment of quality physical education in Chinese secondary schools.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Psychometric Validation of an Intercultural Mediation Questionnaire for Law Enforcement Personnel in Spanish Border Regions.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The relationship between perceived quality physical education and 7-day physical activity among secondary school students in China: the mediating role of exercise self-efficacy.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is a growing emphasis on developing Quality Physical Education (QPE) programs. However, a research gap exists due to the lack of measurement instruments to assess QPE for students. This study aimed to develop an instrument to assess QPE implementation and its validity and reliability in China. This study comprised three phases. In Phase 1, a conceptual framework for QPE was established using grounded theory based on interviews with 22 PE teachers and 20 students. In Phase 2, using the conceptual framework from Phase 1, we developed an item pool supported by a literature review, expert evaluations, and student interviews. In Phase 3, a cross-sectional study was conducted with secondary school students (705 participants) to analyse the items and assess the instrument's reliability and validity through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, as well as test-retest analysis. The final 45-item instrument, comprising four subscales (student, family, school, and community) across 10 factors, demonstrated strong validity and reliability. Model fit indices met established thresholds (e.g., CFI and TLI ≥ .90, as well as RMSEA ≤ .08). The composite reliability and average variance extracted values for each factor exceeded.7 and.5, respectively, with the test-retest reliability also exceeding.7, indicating high reliability and validity. This study addresses a critical methodological gap in QPE research by developing a culturally contextualized assessment instrument that explicitly identifies and measures students' perceptions of QPE implementation. This instrument enables systematic monitoring of QPE practices from students' perspectives, informing evidence-based policymaking and resource allocation. Integrating student, family, school, and community subscales supports holistic interventions to improve the quality of PE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.