The Effectiveness of Physical Literacy Interventions: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
Journal
Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)
ISSN: 1179-2035
Titre abrégé: Sports Med
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 8412297
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
accepted:
20
07
2022
pubmed:
23
8
2022
medline:
29
11
2022
entrez:
22
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The holistic concept of physical literacy assumes that individuals require adequate cognitive (knowledge and understanding), affective (motivation and confidence), and physical (physical competence) qualities to engage in lifelong physical activity behavior. In recent years, the research field has undergone rapid development and has also yielded an increasing number of interventions that aim to translate the theoretical-philosophical ideas into practical endeavors. The goal of the present pre-registered systematic review was to (a) provide a general overview of evaluation studies on physical literacy interventions and (b) to quantitatively examine the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions. Drawing on the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched a total of 18 databases for physical literacy interventions. Inclusion criteria were English language, publication by November 2021, and interventions using physical literacy as a theoretical underpinning or evaluation outcome. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed with respect to their basic delivery characteristics, study quality, evaluation approach, and main findings. We additionally ran meta-analyses with all non-randomized and randomized controlled trials to examine and compare the effect of these interventions on five outcome categories: (i) physical competence, (ii) motivation and confidence, (iii) knowledge and understanding, (iv) physical activity behavior, and (v) total physical literacy. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effects on the different categories. The screening process with two independent raters yielded 48 eligible interventions reported in 51 eligible articles. Quantitative evaluations most frequently addressed physical competence (72.2%), followed by motivation and confidence (47.2%), physical activity behavior (41.7%), and knowledge and understanding (33.3%). The controlled intervention studies (n = 24) exerted significant effects on all five physical literacy categories. Despite meaningful heterogeneity across the subgroups, the strongest effects were found for physical competence (SMD 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.25), followed by physical literacy aggregate scores (SMD 0.61; 95% CI 0.20-1.01), knowledge and understanding (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.79), physical activity behavior (SMD 0.39; 95% CI 0.23-0.55), and motivation and confidence (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.17-0.44). The present study empirically demonstrated the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions on several outcomes relevant for promoting physical activity and health. To better inform current practices, future studies are advised to identify those program characteristics that significantly influence the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions. PROSPERO CRD42020188926.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The holistic concept of physical literacy assumes that individuals require adequate cognitive (knowledge and understanding), affective (motivation and confidence), and physical (physical competence) qualities to engage in lifelong physical activity behavior. In recent years, the research field has undergone rapid development and has also yielded an increasing number of interventions that aim to translate the theoretical-philosophical ideas into practical endeavors.
OBJECTIVE
The goal of the present pre-registered systematic review was to (a) provide a general overview of evaluation studies on physical literacy interventions and (b) to quantitatively examine the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions.
METHODS
Drawing on the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched a total of 18 databases for physical literacy interventions. Inclusion criteria were English language, publication by November 2021, and interventions using physical literacy as a theoretical underpinning or evaluation outcome. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed with respect to their basic delivery characteristics, study quality, evaluation approach, and main findings. We additionally ran meta-analyses with all non-randomized and randomized controlled trials to examine and compare the effect of these interventions on five outcome categories: (i) physical competence, (ii) motivation and confidence, (iii) knowledge and understanding, (iv) physical activity behavior, and (v) total physical literacy. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effects on the different categories.
RESULTS
The screening process with two independent raters yielded 48 eligible interventions reported in 51 eligible articles. Quantitative evaluations most frequently addressed physical competence (72.2%), followed by motivation and confidence (47.2%), physical activity behavior (41.7%), and knowledge and understanding (33.3%). The controlled intervention studies (n = 24) exerted significant effects on all five physical literacy categories. Despite meaningful heterogeneity across the subgroups, the strongest effects were found for physical competence (SMD 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.25), followed by physical literacy aggregate scores (SMD 0.61; 95% CI 0.20-1.01), knowledge and understanding (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.79), physical activity behavior (SMD 0.39; 95% CI 0.23-0.55), and motivation and confidence (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.17-0.44).
CONCLUSIONS
The present study empirically demonstrated the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions on several outcomes relevant for promoting physical activity and health. To better inform current practices, future studies are advised to identify those program characteristics that significantly influence the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020188926.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35994237
doi: 10.1007/s40279-022-01738-4
pii: 10.1007/s40279-022-01738-4
pmc: PMC9691485
doi:
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2965-2999Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
BMC Public Health. 2018 Oct 2;18(Suppl 2):1044
pubmed: 30285682
Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2021 May 26;7(1):113
pubmed: 34039447
Sports (Basel). 2020 Oct 17;8(10):
pubmed: 33080924
BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 11;19(1):393
pubmed: 30971234
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
Front Public Health. 2019 Nov 19;7:346
pubmed: 31803709
Adapt Phys Activ Q. 2019 Apr 1;36(2):202-222
pubmed: 30767562
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021 Mar 16;18(1):37
pubmed: 33726777
Front Public Health. 2020 Apr 24;8:122
pubmed: 32391304
Patient Educ Couns. 2022 Oct;105(10):2999-3016
pubmed: 35641366
Sports Med. 2015 Sep;45(9):1273-1284
pubmed: 26201678
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Oct 15;18(20):
pubmed: 34682596
AIMS Public Health. 2021 Mar 8;8(2):213-228
pubmed: 34017887
Ann Behav Med. 2018 May 18;52(6):501-512
pubmed: 27401001
Health Psychol Rev. 2016;10(1):50-66
pubmed: 25402606
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2016;87(1):14-27
pubmed: 26889581
Sports Med Open. 2021 May 27;7(1):37
pubmed: 34046703
Health Psychol. 2010 Jan;29(1):1-8
pubmed: 20063930
Sports Med. 2018 Mar;48(3):659-682
pubmed: 29143266
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71
pubmed: 33782057
Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2019 Jun;44(6):645-649
pubmed: 31032623
Sports Med. 2022 Apr;52(4):875-920
pubmed: 34463945
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jun 29;21(1):1248
pubmed: 34187441
Open Med. 2009;3(3):e123-30
pubmed: 21603045
Pediatrics. 2013 Nov;132(5):e1361-83
pubmed: 24167179
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2020 Jun;91(2):263-278
pubmed: 31718525
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 23;12(2):e0172520
pubmed: 28231260
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Jan 16;18(1):13
pubmed: 29338694
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021 Oct 8;18(1):131
pubmed: 34620185
Sports (Basel). 2016 Jan 15;4(1):
pubmed: 29910251
Sports Med. 2017 Jan;47(1):113-126
pubmed: 27365029
Curr Opin Cardiol. 2017 Sep;32(5):541-556
pubmed: 28708630
Methods Protoc. 2019 Apr 04;2(2):
pubmed: 31164608
Eur J Sport Sci. 2019 Apr;19(3):267-286
pubmed: 30198825
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 12;17(16):
pubmed: 32806584
BMC Public Health. 2018 Oct 2;18(Suppl 2):1034
pubmed: 30285701
Health Psychol Rev. 2018 Sep;12(3):211-230
pubmed: 29385950
Sports Med. 2017 Oct;47(10):2045-2068
pubmed: 28386652
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Apr 30;17(9):
pubmed: 32365870
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jun 18;17(12):
pubmed: 32570863
Sports Med. 2019 Mar;49(3):371-383
pubmed: 30747375
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020 Sep;116:365-381
pubmed: 32565171
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 11;17(4):
pubmed: 32053937
Prev Med Rep. 2017 May 22;7:58-63
pubmed: 28593124
Health Educ Behav. 2022 Feb;49(1):87-96
pubmed: 34605699
Int J Dev Disabil. 2020 Apr 15;68(2):219-226
pubmed: 35309692
BMC Public Health. 2020 Oct 19;20(1):1569
pubmed: 33076887
Front Sports Act Living. 2022 May 03;4:853247
pubmed: 35592588
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2016;87(1):28-35
pubmed: 26889582
Health Psychol. 2014 May;33(5):465-74
pubmed: 23730717
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 11;17(4):
pubmed: 32053916
J Sports Sci Med. 2021 Jul 01;20(3):516-524
pubmed: 34267592
Health Info Libr J. 2019 Sep;36(3):202-222
pubmed: 31541534
Front Physiol. 2018 Aug 07;9:1057
pubmed: 30131714
Prev Med. 2022 Feb;155:106948
pubmed: 34974071
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Disabil Rehabil. 2022 Mar;44(6):957-966
pubmed: 32633156
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Aug 14;18(16):
pubmed: 34444341
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jun 17;17(12):
pubmed: 32560300
J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2018 Jun 27;3(3):
pubmed: 33466966
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 13;13(6):e0199008
pubmed: 29897985
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 28;18(15):
pubmed: 34360247