Magnusson 2011.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Study design: cluster‐RCT | |
| Participants |
School inclusion criteria: 3 pairs of schools in the city of Reykjavik were selected and matched for size (i.e. number of students and total number of grades, with at least 30 students entering Grade 2 in 2006) School exclusion criteria: — Student inclusion criteria: all children attending Grade 2 Student exclusion criteria: — Setting: school Age group: children Gender distribution: females and males Country/Countries where trial was performed: Iceland |
|
| Interventions |
Intervention: students had opportunities to engage in PA during PE lessons, during recess, and during classes where PA was to be integrated into various subjects of the general curriculum. Teachers at intervention schools were provided access to PA equipment intended to be used during regular school lessons. Teaching materials promoting PA, such as books and DVDs on classroom workouts and cooperative activity games, etc., were provided. After the first year of intervention, an additional PE lesson was introduced at the intervention schools. PE teachers at each of the intervention schools carried out this additional lesson, which was specifically tailored to suit all children while maintaining a high level of intensity Comparator: followed general PA curriculum, compulsory on a national level, consisting of two 40‐minute PE sessions/week, in addition to 2 swimming lessons/week, taught over the course of a 6‐week period any time during the school year Duration of intervention: 2 years Duration of follow‐up: 2 years Number of schools: 6 Theoretical framework: social cognitive theory |
|
| Outcomes | BMI Fitness PA duration |
|
| Study registration | — | |
| Publication details |
Language of publication: English Funding: non‐commercial funding (research funding body) Publication status: peer‐reviewed journal |
|
| Stated aim for study | "The objectives of this study were to compare changes in volume and intensity of PA among the group of intervention children to PA levels of children who only received general curriculum‐based PA (controls) and further, to assess whether the intervention effect on PA was modified by gender or BMI" | |
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: not described |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: not described |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Comment: blinding not possible |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Comment: not described |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Anthropometrics, Fitness | High risk | Comment: large quantity of missing data; reasons not provided |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Physical activity and sedentary time | High risk | Comment: large quantity of missing data; reasons not provided |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: protocol not published |
| Cluster RCT ‐ Recruitment bias | High risk | Comment: schools recruited and randomised 8 months before baseline measurements |
| Cluster RCT ‐ Baseline imbalance | Unclear risk | Comment: adjusted for BMI; many others not considered (e.g. only half of participants had data on socioeconomic status) |
| Cluster RCT ‐ Loss of clusters | Unclear risk | Comment: not described |
| Cluster RCT ‐ Incorrect analysis | Low risk | Comment: clustering accounted for in analysis |