↓ Skip to main content

Process evaluation of a sport-for-health intervention to prevent smoking amongst primary school children: SmokeFree Sports

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Process evaluation of a sport-for-health intervention to prevent smoking amongst primary school children: SmokeFree Sports
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1645-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne Trigwell, Ciara E McGee, Rebecca C Murphy, Lorna A Porcellato, Michael Ussher, Katy Garnham-Lee, Zoe R Knowles, Lawrence Foweather

Abstract

SmokeFree Sports (SFS) was a multi-component sport-for-health intervention aiming at preventing smoking among nine to ten year old primary school children from North West England. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the process and implementation of SFS, examining intervention reach, dose, fidelity, acceptability and sustainability, in order to understand the feasibility and challenges of delivering such interventions and inform interpretations of intervention effectiveness. Process measures included: booking logs, 18 focus groups with children (n = 95), semi-structured interviews with teachers (n = 20) and SFS coaches (n = 7), intervention evaluation questionnaires (completed by children, n = 1097; teachers, n = 50), as well direct observations (by researchers, n = 50 observations) and self-evaluations (completed by teachers, n = 125) of intervention delivery (e.g. length of sessions, implementation of activities as intended, children's engagement and barriers). Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were applied to quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Overall, SFS reached 30.8% of eligible schools, with 1073 children participating in the intervention (across 32 schools). Thirty-one schools completed the intervention in full. Thirty-three teachers (55% female) and 11 SFS coaches (82% male) attended a bespoke SFS training workshop. Disparities in intervention duration (range = 126 to 201 days), uptake (only 25% of classes received optional intervention components in full), and the extent to which core (mean fidelity score of coaching sessions = 58%) and optional components (no adaptions made = 51% of sessions) were delivered as intended, were apparent. Barriers to intervention delivery included the school setting and children's behaviour and knowledge. SFS was viewed positively (85% and 82% of children and teachers, respectively, rated SFS five out of five) and recommendations to increase school engagement were provided. SFS was considered acceptable to children, teachers and coaches. Nevertheless, efforts to enhance intervention reach (at the school level), teachers' engagement and sustainability must be considered. Variations in dose and fidelity likely reflect challenges associated with complex intervention delivery within school settings and thus a flexible design may be necessary. This study adds to the limited scientific evidence base surrounding sport-for-health interventions and their implementation, and suggests that such interventions offer a promising tool for engaging children in activities which promote their health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 108 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Other 6 5%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 33 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 15%
Sports and Recreations 15 14%
Psychology 9 8%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 42 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2017.
All research outputs
#2,469,092
of 24,363,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,864
of 16,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,738
of 268,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#52
of 261 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,363,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,502 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 261 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.