↓ Skip to main content

Active Early: one-year policy intervention to increase physical activity among early care and education programs in Wisconsin

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Active Early: one-year policy intervention to increase physical activity among early care and education programs in Wisconsin
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3198-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tara L. LaRowe, Emily J. Tomayko, Amy M. Meinen, Jill Hoiting, Courtney Saxler, Bridget Cullen, the Wisconsin Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Initiative (WECOPI)

Abstract

Early childcare and education (ECE) is a prime setting for obesity prevention and the establishment of healthy behaviors. The objective of this quasi-experimental study was to examine the efficacy of the Active Early guide, which includes evidenced-based approaches, provider resources, and training, to improve physical activity opportunities through structured (i.e. teacher-led) activity and environmental changes thereby increasing physical activity among children, ages 2-5 years, in the ECE setting. Twenty ECE programs in Wisconsin, 7 family and 13 group, were included. An 80-page guide, Active Early, was developed by experts and statewide partners in the fields of ECE, public health, and physical activity and was revised by ECE providers prior to implementation. Over 12 months, ECE programs received on-site training and technical assistance to implement the strategies and resources provided in the Active Early guide. Main outcome measures included observed minutes of teacher-led physical activity, physical activity environment measured by the Environment and Policy Assessment and Observation (EPAO) instrument, and child physical activity levels via accelerometry. All measures were collected at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months and were analyzed for changes over time. Observed teacher-led physical activity significantly increased from 30.9 ± 22.7 min at baseline to 82.3 ± 41.3 min at 12 months. The change in percent time children spent in sedentary activity decreased significantly after 12 months (-4.4 ± 14.2 % time, -29.2 ± 2.6 min, p < 0.02). Additionally, as teacher led-activity increased, percent time children were sedentary decreased (r = -0.37, p < 0.05) and percent time spent in light physical activity increased (r = 0.35, p < 0.05). Among all ECE programs, the physical activity environment improved significantly as indicated by multiple sub-scales of the EPAO; scores showing the greatest increases were the Training and Education (14.5 ± 6.5 at 12-months vs. 2.4 ± 3.8 at baseline, p < 0.01) and Physical Activity Policy (18.6 ± 4.6 at 12-months vs. 2.0 ± 4.1 at baseline, p < 0.01). Active Early promoted improvements in providing structured (i.e. teacher-led) physical activity beyond the recommended 60 daily minutes using low- to no-cost strategies along with training and environmental changes. Furthermore, it was observed that Active Early positively impacted child physical activity levels by the end of the intervention. However, resources, training, and technical assistance may be necessary for ECE programs to be successful beyond the use of the Active Early guide. Implementing local-level physical activity policies combined with support from local and statewide partners has the potential to influence higher standards for regulated ECE programs.

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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 138 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 17%
Researcher 22 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 36 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 16%
Social Sciences 16 11%
Sports and Recreations 13 9%
Psychology 7 5%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 42 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 January 2017.
All research outputs
#7,240,924
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,626
of 14,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,365
of 363,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#191
of 354 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,922 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 363,722 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 354 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.