Ewart 1998.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Study design: RCT | |
| Participants |
Student inclusion criteria: after parental consent was obtained, all entering Grade 9 students were invited to participate in health screening. Girls with blood pressure in the top third of normal distribution for systolic or diastolic pressure were invited to participate Student exclusion criteria: — Setting: school, home, urban Age group: adolescents Gender distribution: females Country/Countries where trial was performed: USA |
|
| Interventions |
Intervention: 50‐minute 'Project Heart' aerobic exercise classes including didactic instruction over 18 weeks Comparator: 50‐minute standard PE classes Duration of intervention: 18 weeks Duration of follow‐up: 18 weeks Number of schools: 1 Theoretical framework: — |
|
| Outcomes | BMI | |
| Study registration | — | |
| Publication details |
Language of publication: English Funding: non‐commercial funding (RO1‐HL45139 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to the first study author) Publication status: peer‐reviewed journal |
|
| Stated aim for study | "The present study evaluated the effectiveness of a school‐based aerobic exercise intervention, Project Heart, in increasing cardiorespiratory fitness and lowering blood pressure in adolescent girls at increased risk for hypertension" | |
| Notes | ||
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Comment: randomisation process not reported |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Comment: all participants were allocated at a single point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment, allocation was not known |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Comment: No information given; likely not done |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Comment: reported that technicians taking measurements were not aware of girls' experimental status |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Anthropometrics, Fitness | Low risk | Comment: outcome data complete |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on |