Effects of Holistically Conceptualised School-Based Interventions on Children's Physical Literacy, Physical Activity, and Other Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Adolescent
Child
Motor skills
Physical education
Journal
Sports medicine - open
ISSN: 2199-1170
Titre abrégé: Sports Med Open
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101662568
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Sep 2024
27 Sep 2024
Historique:
received:
05
03
2024
accepted:
20
08
2024
medline:
28
9
2024
pubmed:
28
9
2024
entrez:
27
9
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Schools are a key setting for promoting children's physical literacy development. This review aimed to identify school-based interventions that adopted a holistic conceptualisation of physical literacy and examine the effects on children's physical literacy and any other outcomes, including physical activity (PA). Searches were conducted in seven databases (APA PsycINFO, EMBASE, ERIC, CINAHL, Global Health, MEDLINE Complete, SPORTDiscus with Full Text), and Google and Google Scholar, to identify articles published since 1/1/2017. Studies were included if they (i) adopted a holistic conception of physical literacy as represented by the Australian Physical Literacy Framework (APLF), (ii) were grounded in movement, (iii) assessed three or more domains of learning (either quantitatively or qualitatively), and (iv) included children aged 5-14 years. Quantitative research designs needed to provide pre-and post-intervention measures, whereas qualitative designs (e.g. post-intervention interviews) did not. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by teams of two authors. For intervention effects, quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised separately. For quantitative data, level of evidence for intervention effects was assessed by physical literacy domain and/or elements/items by examining the proportion of tests with a significant change in the expected direction. Qualitative data were synthesised using the framework synthesis method and mapped to a framework that included APLF domains/elements, PA, and additional outcomes. Twelve interventions with 1,427 participants from seven countries were identified: six physical education-based, three afterschool, one structured recess, and two multicomponent. All studies assessed the physical domain quantitatively, with strong positive evidence of intervention effects for the controlled designs (10 of 15 tests). For the affective and cognitive domains, evidence was mixed, and there was no evidence for interventions improving the social components of children's physical literacy (although this was understudied). Most studies assessed PA and one measured cognitive performance; however, there was no evidence for positive intervention effects (i.e. ≥35% of tests reporting an improvement) for either outcome. Five studies assessed intervention effects qualitatively, with positive results reported for all physical literacy domains, PA, and cognitive performance. Holistic interventions in schools can improve the physical domain of children's physical literacy. For wider benefits, future interventions should aim to develop all facets of physical literacy, especially domains of learning less frequently targeted and examined. PROSPERO CRD42022351317.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Schools are a key setting for promoting children's physical literacy development. This review aimed to identify school-based interventions that adopted a holistic conceptualisation of physical literacy and examine the effects on children's physical literacy and any other outcomes, including physical activity (PA).
METHODS
METHODS
Searches were conducted in seven databases (APA PsycINFO, EMBASE, ERIC, CINAHL, Global Health, MEDLINE Complete, SPORTDiscus with Full Text), and Google and Google Scholar, to identify articles published since 1/1/2017. Studies were included if they (i) adopted a holistic conception of physical literacy as represented by the Australian Physical Literacy Framework (APLF), (ii) were grounded in movement, (iii) assessed three or more domains of learning (either quantitatively or qualitatively), and (iv) included children aged 5-14 years. Quantitative research designs needed to provide pre-and post-intervention measures, whereas qualitative designs (e.g. post-intervention interviews) did not. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by teams of two authors. For intervention effects, quantitative and qualitative data were synthesised separately. For quantitative data, level of evidence for intervention effects was assessed by physical literacy domain and/or elements/items by examining the proportion of tests with a significant change in the expected direction. Qualitative data were synthesised using the framework synthesis method and mapped to a framework that included APLF domains/elements, PA, and additional outcomes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twelve interventions with 1,427 participants from seven countries were identified: six physical education-based, three afterschool, one structured recess, and two multicomponent. All studies assessed the physical domain quantitatively, with strong positive evidence of intervention effects for the controlled designs (10 of 15 tests). For the affective and cognitive domains, evidence was mixed, and there was no evidence for interventions improving the social components of children's physical literacy (although this was understudied). Most studies assessed PA and one measured cognitive performance; however, there was no evidence for positive intervention effects (i.e. ≥35% of tests reporting an improvement) for either outcome. Five studies assessed intervention effects qualitatively, with positive results reported for all physical literacy domains, PA, and cognitive performance.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Holistic interventions in schools can improve the physical domain of children's physical literacy. For wider benefits, future interventions should aim to develop all facets of physical literacy, especially domains of learning less frequently targeted and examined.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
PROSPERO CRD42022351317.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39333343
doi: 10.1186/s40798-024-00766-w
pii: 10.1186/s40798-024-00766-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
105Subventions
Organisme : Australian Sports Commission
ID : Australian Sports Commission
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Edwards LC, et al. Definitions, foundations and associations of physical literacy: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2017;47(1):113–26.
Tremblay MS, et al. Canada’s physical literacy consensus statement: process and outcome. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(2):1034.
pubmed: 30285701
pmcid: 6167775
doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5903-x
Whitehead M. The concept of physical literacy. Eur J Phys Educ. 2001;6(2):127.
doi: 10.1080/1740898010060205
Australian Sports Commission. Australian physical literacy Framework. Australian Sports Commission: Canberra; 2019.
Gallahue DL, Ozmun JC, Goodway J. Understanding motor development: infants, children, adolescents, adults. McGraw-Hill; 2012.
Brown DMY, Dudley DA, Cairney J. Physical literacy profiles are associated with differences in children’s physical activity participation: A latent profile analysis approach. J Sci medi sport. 2020;23(11):1062-67.
Keegan RJ, et al. Defining physical literacy for application in Australia: a modified delphi method. J Teach Phys Educ. 2019;38(2):105–18.
doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0264
Young L, O’Connor J, Alfrey L. Physical literacy: a concept analysis. Sport Educ Soc. 2020;25(8):946–59.
doi: 10.1080/13573322.2019.1677586
Martins J, et al. International approaches to the definition, philosophical tenets, and core elements of physical literacy: a scoping review. Prospects. 2021;50(1):13–30.
doi: 10.1007/s11125-020-09466-1
Belton S, et al. Are all domains created equal? An exploration of stakeholder views on the concept of physical literacy. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):501.
pubmed: 35287646
pmcid: 8922859
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-12931-5
Whitehead ME, Durden-Myers EJ, Pot N. The value of fostering physical literacy. J Teach Phys Educ. 2018;37(3):252–61.
doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0139
Sport England. Physical literacy consensus statement for England. 2023 [accessed 22 September 2023]; https://www.sportengland.org/funds-and-campaigns/children-and-young-people?section=physical_literacy
Keegan RJ, Barnett LM, Dudley D. Physical literacy: informing a definition and standard for Australia. Australian Sports Commission; 2017.
Shearer C, et al. Assessments related to the physical, affective and cognitive domains of physical literacy Amongst Children aged 7–11.9 years: a systematic review. Sports Med - Open. 2021;7(1):37.
pubmed: 34046703
pmcid: 8160065
doi: 10.1186/s40798-021-00324-8
Carl J, et al. The effectiveness of physical literacy interventions: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2022;52(12):2965–99.
pubmed: 35994237
pmcid: 9691485
doi: 10.1007/s40279-022-01738-4
Cornish K, et al. Understanding physical literacy in the context of health: a rapid scoping review. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1569.
pubmed: 33076887
pmcid: 7570403
doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09583-8
Speltz ML, et al. Brief report: cognitive and psychomotor development of infants with orofacial clefts. J Pediatr Psychol. 2000;25(3):185–90.
pubmed: 10780146
doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/25.3.185
Hoque M. Three domains of learning: cognitive, affective and psychomotor. J EFL Educ Res. 2016;2(2):45–52.
Harari JR, Jorgensen JA, Stolk JD. Same course, different goals: Examining the personal goals of men and women in a project-based engineering environment in 2014. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings. 2014.
Carl J, et al. How are physical literacy interventions conceptualized? A systematic review on intervention design and content. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2022;58:102091.
doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2021.102091
Active Healthy Kids Australia. Muscular fitness: it’s time for a jump start. The 2018 active healthy kids australia report card on physical activity for children and young people. Active Healthy Kids Australia: South Australia; 2018.
Ramstetter C, et al. Recess in the 21st Century Post-COVID World. J Sch Health. 2022;92(10):941–4.
pubmed: 35975616
pmcid: 9543454
doi: 10.1111/josh.13235
Ridgers ND, et al. School recess physical activity interventions, in Brusseau T, Fairclough SJ, and Lubans DE editors. the Routledge Handbook of Youth Physical Activity. New York: Routledge; 2020. pp. 504–22.
Hyndman B. Contemporary School Playground strategies for healthy students. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2017. pp. 85–91.
doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-4738-1
Barbosa Filho VC et al. Scoping review on interventions for physical activity and physical literacy components in Brazilian school-aged children and adolescents. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(16).
Liu Y, Chen S. Physical literacy in children and adolescents: definitions, assessments, and interventions. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2021;27(1):96–112.
doi: 10.1177/1356336X20925502
Bopp T, et al. Physical Literacy Research in the United States: a systematic review of academic literature. Am J Health Educ. 2022;53(5):282–96.
doi: 10.1080/19325037.2022.2100524
Anico S, et al. The effectiveness of school-based run/walk programmes to develop physical literacy and physical activity components in primary school children: a systematic review. J Sports Sci. 2022;40(22):2552–69.
pubmed: 36812370
doi: 10.1080/02640414.2023.2174720
Lizarondo L, et al. Chap. 8: Mixed methods systematic reviews. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI: 2020. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global . https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-09 .
Carroll C, et al. Best fit framework synthesis: refining the method. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):37.
pubmed: 23497061
pmcid: 3618126
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-37
Sport Australia. Australian physical literacy framework. Australian sports commission: Canberra; 2019.
Page MJ, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
pubmed: 33782057
pmcid: 8005924
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
International Physical Literacy Association. Physical Literacy. 2014 [accessed 31 July 2022]; https://www.physical-literacy.org.uk/
van Sluijs E, McMinn A, Griffin S. Effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity in children and adolescents: systematic review of controlled trials. BMJ. 2007;335(7622):703.
pubmed: 17884863
pmcid: 2001088
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39320.843947.BE
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. CASP, Qualitative Checklist. [online]. 2018 [accessed 10 September 2022]; https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018.pdf
Lubans DR, et al. Fundamental Movement skills in children and adolescents. Sports Med. 2010;40(12):1019–35.
pubmed: 21058749
doi: 10.2165/11536850-000000000-00000
Page ZE, et al. Do active video games benefit the motor skill development of non-typically developing children and adolescents: a systematic review. J Sci Med Sport. 2017;20(12):1087–100.
pubmed: 28600111
doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.05.001
Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J. An introduction to systematic reviews. 2nd Edition. 2017, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Brunton G, Oliver S, Thomas J. Innovations in framework synthesis as a systematic review method. Res Synthesis Methods. 2020;11(3):316–30.
doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1399
Piggin J. What is physical activity? A holistic definition for teachers, researchers and policy makers. Front Sports Act Living. 2020;2(72).
Jimenez-Garcia JA, Miller MB, DeMont RG. Effects of multicomponent injury prevention programs on children and adolescents’ fundamental movement skills: a systematic review with meta-analyses. Am J Health Promotion. 2023;37(5):705–19.
doi: 10.1177/08901171221146434
Miyahara M. Physical literacy as a framework of assessment and intervention for children and youth with developmental coordination disorder: a narrative critical review of conventional practice and proposal for future directions. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(12).
Saxena S, Shikako K, Thomas. Physical literacy programs for children with disabilities: a realist review. Leisure/Loisir. 2020;44(2):199–224.
doi: 10.1080/14927713.2020.1760119
Pushkarenko K, Dunn JC, Wohlers B. Physical literacy and inclusion: a scoping review of the physical literacy literature inclusive of individuals experiencing disability. Prospects. 2021;50(1):107–26.
doi: 10.1007/s11125-020-09497-8
Invernizzi PL, et al. Multi-teaching styles Approach and active reflection: effectiveness in improving Fitness Level, Motor competence, enjoyment, amount of physical activity, and effects on the perception of Physical Education lessons in Primary School Children. Sustainability. 2019;11(2):405.
doi: 10.3390/su11020405
Bremer E, Graham JD, Cairney J. Outcomes and feasibility of a 12-week physical literacy intervention for children in an afterschool program. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(9).
Stoddart AL et al. PLitPE: an intervention for physical literacy enriched pedagogy in Canadian elementary school physical education classes. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2021;28(6):1–17.
Mandigo J, Lodewyk K, Tredway J. Examining the impact of a teaching games for understanding approach on the development of physical literacy using the Passport for Life assessment tool. J Teach Phys Educ. 2019;38(2):136–45.
doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0028
Kriellaars DJ, et al. The impact of circus arts instruction in physical education on the physical literacy of children in grades 4 and 5. J Teach Phys Educ. 2019;38(2):162–70.
doi: 10.1123/jtpe.2018-0269
Coyne P, et al. Physical literacy improves with the Run Jump Throw Wheel program among students in grades 4–6 in southwestern Ontario. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2019;44(6):645–9.
pubmed: 31032623
doi: 10.1139/apnm-2018-0495
Caldwell HAT et al. The impact of an after-school physical activity program on children’s physical activity and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods evaluation study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(9).
Telford RM, et al. Student outcomes of the physical education and physical literacy (PEPL) approach: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial of a multicomponent intervention to improve physical literacy in primary schools. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2021;26(1):97–110.
doi: 10.1080/17408989.2020.1799967
Li MH, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a blended physical literacy intervention to support physical activity and health of primary school children. Sports Med - Open. 2022;8(1):1–12.
doi: 10.1186/s40798-022-00448-5
Farias C, Wallhead T, Mesquita I. The project changed my life: Sport Education’s transformative potential on student physical literacy. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2020;91(2):263–78.
pubmed: 31718525
doi: 10.1080/02701367.2019.1661948
Mendoza-Muñoz M et al. Effects of active breaks on physical literacy: a cross-sectional pilot study in a region of Spain. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(13).
Liu Y, Chen S. Characterizing middle school students’ physical literacy development: a self-determination theory-based pilot intervention in physical education. Front Sports Act Living. 2022;3:809447.
pubmed: 35098123
pmcid: 8790235
doi: 10.3389/fspor.2021.809447
Physical and Health Education Canada. Teachers Guide: Passport for life. 2013 [accessed 9 March 2023]; http://passportforlife.ca/teacher/teachers-guide
Barnett LM, et al. Validity, reliability, and feasibility of physical literacy assessments designed for school children: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2023;53(10):1905–29.
pubmed: 37341907
pmcid: 10504218
doi: 10.1007/s40279-023-01867-4
Edwards LC, et al. Measuring’ physical literacy and related constructs: a systematic review of empirical findings. Sports Med. 2018;48(3):659–682.
doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0817-9
Dudley D, et al. What drives quality physical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis of learning and development effects from physical education-based interventions. Front Psychol; 2022;13.
Stodden DFG, et al. A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: an emergent relationship. Quest. 2008;60:290–306.
Sterdt E, Liersch S, Walter U. Correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents: a systematic review of reviews. Health Educ J. 2014;73(1):72–89.
doi: 10.1177/0017896912469578
Barnett LM, et al. Through the looking glass: a systematic review of longitudinal evidence, providing new Insight for motor competence and health. Sports Med. 2022;52(4):875–920.
pubmed: 34463945
doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01516-8
Barnett LM, et al. A reverse pathway? Actual and perceived skill proficiency and physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(5):898–904.
pubmed: 20962694
doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181fdfadd
Ma J, et al. It’s not just what you do but the way you do it: a systematic review of process evaluation of interventions to improve gross motor competence. Sports Med. 2021;51(12):2547–69.
pubmed: 34339044
doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01519-5
Barnett LM, et al. Reliability and validity of the PL-C Quest, a scale designed to assess children’s self-reported physical literacy. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2022;60:102164.
doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102164
Whitehead M. Physical Literacy: Throughout the Lifecourse. Oxfordshire England: Routledge; 2010.
doi: 10.4324/9780203881903
Rudd JR et al. Physical literacy - a journey of individual enrichment: an ecological dynamics rationale for enhancing performance and physical activity in all. Front Psychol, 2020;11.
de Balazs ACR, de D’Amico RL, Cedeño JJM. Alfabetización física: Una percepción reflexiva. Dialógica Rev Multidiscip. 2017;14:87–102.