Lau 2016.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Study design: RCT | |
| Participants |
Student inclusion criteria: all students in Grade 4 Student exclusion criteria: — Setting: school Age group: children Gender distribution: females and males Country/Countries where trial was performed: China |
|
| Interventions |
Intervention: children participated in two 60‐minute Xbox 260 Kinect gaming sessions/week after school for 12 school weeks. Children were free to choose games from the 12 offered sports in Season 1 or Season 2 within a play session. This approach was chosen to encourage children’s autonomy and to enhance attractiveness and the challenge of game play. Children and their partners with consensus of opinion had their own choice on the order of games, what they wanted to play, and the duration of each game play. Participants could get awarded based on degree and speed of movement and level of difficulty Comparator: adopted regular PA and PE class and received no additional intervention Duration of intervention: 12 weeks Duration of follow‐up: 12 weeks Number of schools: 1 Theoretical framework: — |
|
| Outcomes | PA duration Fitness BMI |
|
| Study registration | — | |
| Publication details |
Language of publication: English Funding: non‐commercial funding (research funding body) Publication status: peer‐reviewed journal |
|
| Stated aim for study | "Thus, besides the effect of an active video games intervention on children’s aerobic fitness and PA level, this study also sought to explore the active video games impact on players’ psychological correlates, including PA task efficacy, barrier efficacy, and enjoyment" | |
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Comment: random numbers table [author communication] |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | Comment: allocation not concealed from investigators [author communication] |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Comment: no blinding of participants |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Comment: outcome assessors were blinded [author communication] |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Anthropometrics, Fitness | Low risk | Comment: no loss to follow up |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Physical activity and sedentary time | Low risk | Comment: no loss to follow up |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: no protocol published |