Table 2.

Overview of included studies

Author, year and setting	Study design	sample size intervention/ control	Age (range or mean ± SD), sex (n or % m/f	Intervention duration	Outcome(s)	Intervention Details	Comparison / Treatment	EPHPP Quality Rating
Adamo et al. 2016 [22]& Goldfield et al. 2016 Canada [24]	Cluster RCT	40/ 43	Intervention: age (3.4 ± 0.3), sex (18/22) Control: age (3.4 ± 0.4), sex (23/20)	6-months	PA measured using an Actical accelerometer FMS measured using the TGMD-2 Weight status measured using stadiometer and digital scales.	Two 3-h training workshops to childcare providers. Workshops encouraged childcare providers to provide more outdoor active play (manuals provided). Basic equipment provided. Bi-weekly booster sessions provided.	Regular childhood curriculum	Moderate
Engelen et al. 2013 Australia [34]	Cluster RCT	113/ 108	Intervention: age (6.0 ± 0.6), sex (59/54) Control: age, (6.0 ± 0.6), sex (60/48)	13-weeks	PA measured using an ActiGraph accelerometer	Loose parts equipment provided in the playground. Two-hour information session for staff on playground duties aimed at highlighting the benefits of active free play.	Standard break times	Weak
O’Dwyer et al. 2012 England [36]	Cluster RCT	33/ 43	All: age (3.8 ± 0.6), sex (52%/48%),	10-weeks	PA measured using an ActiGraph accelerometer	5 sessions over 10 weeks. 60 min delivery. The first 20 min children and parents were separated. Parents received educational component and children participated in active play. Final 40 min both children and parents participated in active play together.	No treatment	Weak
Tortella et al. 2016 Italy [35]	Cluster RCT	71/ 39	Intervention: age (5.6 ± 0.31), sex (41/30) Control: age (5.7 ± 0.3), sex (22/17)	10-weeks	FMS measured using Movement ABC	30 min of free play and 30 min of structured activities once a week for 10 weeks in the playground	No treatment	Weak

RCT randomised controlled trial, SD standard deviation, n number