↓ Skip to main content

Utilising active play interventions to promote physical activity and improve fundamental movement skills in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
51 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
213 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Utilising active play interventions to promote physical activity and improve fundamental movement skills in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5687-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Avril Johnstone, Adrienne R. Hughes, Anne Martin, John J. Reilly

Abstract

Children's physical activity levels are low and efforts to improve their physical activity levels have proven difficult. Freely chosen and unstructured physical activity (active play) has the potential to be promoted in a variety of settings and potentially every day of the year in contrast to other physical activity domains, but active play interventions are an under-researched area. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review was to determine the effect of active play interventions on children's physical activity levels, particularly moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA), and fundamental movement skills (FMS). Studies were included if they were solely or  predominantly active play randomised, or cluster randomised controlled trials that targeted children aged 3-12 years. They had to report on at least one of the following outcomes: objectively measured physical activity, FMS, cognition and weight status. During December 2016, four databases (PE Index, SPORTDiscus, Medline and ERIC) were searched for relevant titles. Duplicates and irrelevant titles and abstracts were removed. The included studies had their quality assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool. Suitable studies were combined in a meta-analysis using a random-effect model. A narrative synthesis was conducted for all outcomes. Of the 4033 records, 91 studies were eligible for full text screening, of which 87 were removed, leaving four studies (representing five papers). The meta-analysis of two studies highlighted there was no significant effect of active play interventions on MVPA. However, the narrative synthesis suggested that active play interventions may increase total volume of physical activity. Only two studies examined the effect of active play interventions on children's FMS, one study examined effects on weight status and none examined effects on cognition. Due to the small number of eligible studies and their heterogeneity, the review could not draw firm conclusions on the effect of active play interventions on children's physical activity levels. High-quality active play interventions, targeting different times of the day (school and after school) in different populations and settings, and with a wider range of outcomes, are required to determine the potential of active play.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 213 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 213 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 13%
Student > Bachelor 20 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 8%
Researcher 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 81 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 45 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 8%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Psychology 8 4%
Other 23 11%
Unknown 93 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 18 January 2019.
All research outputs
#995,013
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,075
of 16,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,236
of 333,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#30
of 322 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,119 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 333,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 322 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.