↓ Skip to main content

School-based intervention on healthy behaviour among Ecuadorian adolescents: effect of a cluster-randomized controlled trial on screen-time

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
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
School-based intervention on healthy behaviour among Ecuadorian adolescents: effect of a cluster-randomized controlled trial on screen-time
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2274-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susana Andrade, Maïté Verloigne, Greet Cardon, Patrick Kolsteren, Angelica Ochoa-Avilés, Roosmarijn Verstraeten, Silvana Donoso, Carl Lachat

Abstract

Effective interventions on screen-time behaviours (television, video games and computer time) are needed to prevent non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries. The present manuscript investigates the effect of a school-based health promotion intervention on screen-time behaviour among 12- to 15-year-old adolescents. We report the effect of the trial on screen-time after two stages of implementation. We performed a cluster-randomised pair matched trial in urban schools in Cuenca-Ecuador. Participants were adolescents of grade eight and nine (mean age 12.8 ± 0.8 years, n = 1370, control group n = 684) from 20 schools (control group n = 10). The intervention included an individual and environmental component tailored to the local context and resources. The first intervention stage focused on diet, physical activity and screen-time behaviour, while the second stage focused only on diet and physical activity. Screen-time behaviours, primary outcome, were assessed at baseline, after the first (18 months) and second stage (28 months). Mixed linear models were used to analyse the data. After the first stage (data from n = 1224 adolescents; control group n = 608), the intervention group had a lower increase in TV-time on a week day (β = -15.7 min; P = 0.003) and weekend day (β = -18.9 min; P = 0.005), in total screen-time on a weekday (β = -25.9 min; P = 0.03) and in the proportion of adolescents that did not meet the screen-time recommendation (β = -4 percentage point; P = 0.01), compared to the control group. After the second stage (data from n = 1078 adolescents; control group n = 531), the TV-time on a weekday (β = 13.1 min; P = 0.02), and total screen-time on a weekday (β = 21.4 min; P = 0.03) increased more in adolescents from the intervention group. No adverse effects were reported. A multicomponent school-based intervention was only able to mitigate the increase in adolescents' television time and total screen-time after the first stage of the intervention or in other words, when the intervention included specific components or activities that focused on reducing screen-time. After the second stage of the intervention, which only included components and activities related to improve healthy diet and physical activity and not to decrease the screen-time, the adolescents increased their screen-time again. Our findings might imply that reducing screen-time is only possible when the intervention focuses specifically on reducing screen-time. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01004367 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 237 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 17%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Researcher 24 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 5%
Other 53 22%
Unknown 63 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 12%
Social Sciences 23 10%
Sports and Recreations 17 7%
Psychology 15 6%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 71 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 June 2021.
All research outputs
#16,114,790
of 25,468,789 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,294
of 17,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,169
of 286,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#202
of 291 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,468,789 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,615 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 286,180 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 291 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.