↓ Skip to main content

The ACT-i-Pass study protocol: How does free access to recreation opportunities impact children’s physical activity levels?

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
The ACT-i-Pass study protocol: How does free access to recreation opportunities impact children’s physical activity levels?
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2637-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason A. Gilliland, Andrew F. Clark, Patricia Tucker, Harry Prapavessis, William Avison, Piotr Wilk

Abstract

Physical activity during childhood is associated with a multitude of physical, behavioural, and psychological health benefits. Identification of effective population level strategies for increasing children's physical activity levels is critical for improving the overall health of Canadians. The overall objective of this study is to assess how a naturally-occurring, community-level intervention which offers Grade 5 children in London, Canada a free access pass to physical activity opportunities (facilities and programs) for an entire school year can lead to increased physical activity among recipients. This study adopts a longitudinal cohort study design to assess the effectiveness of improving children's access to physical activity opportunities for increasing their physical activity levels. To meet our overall objective we have three aims: (1) to assess whether the provision of free access increases children's physical activity levels during and after the intervention compared to a control group; (2) to assess how and why child-specific trajectories of physical activity (between-children differences in level of physical activity measured across time) in the intervention group differ according to children's individual and household characteristics; and (3) to explore additional factors that are unaccounted for in the theoretical model to gain a further understanding of why the free access intervention had varying effects on changing physical activity levels. We will be addressing these aims using a mixed methods approach, including: a series of youth surveys conducted before, during, immediately after, and 4-months after the intervention; parent surveys before, during, and post-intervention; real-time tracking of the access pass use during the intervention; and focus groups at the conclusion of the intervention. Data compiled from the youth surveys will provide a subjective measure of physical activity to be used as our outcome measure to address our primary aims. The results of this study can inform policy- and decision-makers about the sub-groups of the population that benefitted the most (or least) from the intervention to provide more specific information on how to develop and target future interventions to have a greater impact on the physical activity levels and overall health of children.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 34 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 17 15%
Sports and Recreations 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Psychology 7 6%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 39 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,433,196
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,865
of 14,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,922
of 390,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#219
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 390,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.