Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41216266›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2025

Introducing the Multidimensional Toolkit for the Assessment of Play in Schools (M-TAPS): a reliability study.

Helen Dodd, Rachel Nesbit, Lily FitzGibbon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Helen DoddSchool of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1446-5338
Rachel NesbitSchool of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7540-3187
Lily FitzGibbonSchool of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, England, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite increasing interest in changing and improving play opportunities in schools, there is lack of openly available methods for evaluating play quantitatively. Existing measures often focus on physical activity during play activities or prioritise the mapping of locations within which play occurs rather than evaluating play itself. Methods: This paper introduces the Multidimensional Toolkit for the Assessment of Play in Schools (M-TAPS) and provides the results of an initial study examining the utility and reliability of the toolkit. The M-TAPS includes observations of individual children and scan observations of predefined areas of the playground; children's activities, adventure/risk level and affect are coded. In addition, the M-TAPS includes child self-report questionnaires about emotions during playtime and playtime activities. Results: The reliability study provided evidence of good reliability between coders and for children's self-report of their emotions during playtime. There was some indication of validity between child self-report and coder observation. Conclusions: The paper suggests that the M-TAPS may be useful for research focused on improving children's play in schools where a quantitative measure is sought. The M-TAPS provides a flexible tool for supporting researchers with the results highlighting how the M-TAPS can provide insights into schools playtimes and how observation can be combined with children's self-report. There is room for further development and refinement of the toolkit.

Indexed as

Play and PlaythingsSchoolsChildEmotionsFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportSurveys and Questionnairesplay; playtime; recess; measure; observation; child

Identifiers

PMID41216266
PMCPMC12596566

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.