Cited by 1,358Physical Activity and HealthObesity, Physical Activity, DietSchool Health and Nursing Education

School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18

Open access
Dobbins, Maureen, Husson, Heather, DeCorby, Kara, LaRocca, Rebecca L·2013·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physical activity among children and adolescents is associated with lower adiposity, improved cardio-metabolic health, and improved fitness. Worldwide, fewer than 30% of children and adolescents meet global physical activity recommendations of at least 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day. Schools may be ideal sites for interventions given that children and adolescents in most parts of the world spend a substantial amount of time in transit to and from school or attending school. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review update is to summarise the evidence on effectiveness of school-based interventions in increasing moderate to vigorous physical activity and improving fitness among children and adolescents 6 to 18 years of age. Specific objectives are: • to evaluate the effects of school-based interventions on increasing physical activity and improving fitness among children and adolescents; • to evaluate the effects of school-based interventions on improving body composition; and • to determine whether certain combinations or components (or both) of school-based interventions are more effective than others in promoting physical activity and fitness in this target population. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, BIOSIS, SPORTDiscus, and Sociological Abstracts to 1 June 2020, without language restrictions. We screened reference lists of included articles and relevant systematic reviews. We contacted primary authors of studies to ask for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible interventions were relevant to public health practice (i.e. were not delivered by a clinician), were implemented in the school setting, and aimed to increase physical activity among all school-attending children and adolescents (aged 6 to 18) for at least 12 weeks. The review was limited to randomised controlled trials. For this update, we have added two new criteria: the primary aim of the study was to increase physical activity or fitness, and the study used an objective measure of physical activity or fitness. Primary outcomes included proportion of participants meeting physical activity guidelines and duration of moderate to vigorous physical activity and sedentary time (new to this update). Secondary outcomes included measured body mass index (BMI), physical fitness, health-related quality of life (new to this update), and adverse events (new to this update). Television viewing time, blood cholesterol, and blood pressure have been removed from this update. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors used standardised forms to assess each study for relevance, to extract data, and to assess risk of bias. When discrepancies existed, discussion occurred until consensus was reached. Certainty of evidence was assessed according to GRADE. A random-effects meta-analysis based on the inverse variance method was conducted with participants stratified by age (children versus adolescents) when sufficient data were reported. Subgroup analyses explored effects by intervention type. MAIN RESULTS: Based on the three new inclusion criteria, we excluded 16 of the 44 studies included in the previous version of this review. We screened an additional 9968 titles (search October 2011 to June 2020), of which 978 unique studies were potentially relevant and 61 met all criteria for this update. We included a total of 89 studies representing complete data for 66,752 study participants. Most studies included children only (n = 56), followed by adolescents only (n = 22), and both (n = 10); one study did not report student age. Multi-component interventions were most common (n = 40), followed by schooltime physical activity (n = 19), enhanced physical education (n = 15), and before and after school programmes (n = 14); one study explored both enhanced physical education and an after school programme. Lack of blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors and loss to follow-up were the most common sources of bias. Results show that school-based physical activity interventions probably result in little to no increase in time engaged in moderate to vigorous physical activity (mean difference (MD) 0.73 minutes/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 1.30; 33 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and may lead to little to no decrease in sedentary time (MD -3.78 minutes/d, 95% CI -7.80 to 0.24; 16 studies; low-certainty evidence). School-based physical activity interventions may improve physical fitness reported as maximal oxygen uptake (VO₂max) (MD 1.19 mL/kg/min, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.82; 13 studies; low-certainty evidence). School-based physical activity interventions may result in a very small decrease in BMI z-scores (MD -0.06, 95% CI -0.09 to -0.02; 21 studies; low-certainty evidence) and may not impact BMI expressed as kg/m² (MD -0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.01; 50 studies; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether school-based physical activity in

AI snapshot

Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).

TL;DR

This updated Cochrane review of 44 RCTs (36,593 participants) found school-based physical activity interventions had mixed, generally modest effects on children’s physical activity and fitness. The evidence was graded low quality and likely overestimates true treatment effects.

Key findings

  • Behavioral outcomes were mixed: 2 of 5 studies reported significant positive effects on physical activity rates, 14 of 23 on duration of MVPA, and 7 of 16 on television viewing (with 1 favoring control). Simon 2004 found intervention children were almost three times more likely to be active outside school (OR 2.74, 95% CI 2.01 to 3.75); Robinson 1999 reported a 50-minute/day decrease in TV viewing versus 10 minutes/day in controls (P < 0.001).
  • Physical health outcomes showed limited positive effects: 4 of 16 studies for systolic blood pressure, 3 of 16 for diastolic blood pressure, 1 of 10 for cholesterol, 8 of 32 for BMI, 4 of 6 for VO₂max, and 1 of 6 for pulse rate. BMI intervention groups gained 0.1 to 1.0 kg/m² less than controls; VO₂max improvements ranged from 1.6 to 3.7 mL/kg/min.
  • The review’s GRADE ratings for main outcomes were low quality. Longer interventions and combinations of school curricula, printed educational materials, educational sessions, physical activity sessions, and community-based strategies were suggested as potentially effective, but effects were modest.

Methods

  • Systematic review of randomized controlled trials; inclusion required a school-based intervention relevant to public health practice, aimed at all school-attending children aged 6 to 18, with a minimum duration of 12 weeks. Searches ran to October 2011 and identified 44 included studies with 36,593 participants.
  • Two independent reviewers assessed relevance, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias using Cochrane criteria. Results were synthesized narratively because populations, interventions, and outcomes varied widely; no meta-analysis was conducted.

Limitations

  • The paper states major limitations: lack of blinding (especially outcome assessors), reliance on self-report for most behavioral outcomes, inconsistent outcome measurement, poor description of randomization, unit-of-analysis errors, few intention-to-treat analyses (16 studies), and high attrition/incomplete data—all likely overestimating treatment effects.
  • The paper also states that adverse effects were generally not reported, cost-effectiveness was assessed in only one study, searches were limited to English-language databases, and applicability to low- and middle-income countries is unclear.
  • Evident from the text: most studies were conducted in developed countries, populations and interventions were highly heterogeneous, and no meta-analysis was possible, limiting generalizability and precision.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd007651.pub2

Cites

1064 of 1064 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 164 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    From the published reports included in the update, all studies appeared to report the outcomes they intended to as stated in their Methods sections.

    “It appears, from the published reports included in this update, that all studies reported on the outcomes that they intended to as reported in the Methods sections of the published papers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    All included studies had intervention components delivered in the school setting.

    “All studies had intervention components that were delivered in the school setting.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The most notable methodological weakness of included studies was lack of blinding of participants, providers, outcome assessors, and data analysts.

    “The most notable methodological weakness of these studies was the lack of blinding of participants, providers, outcome assessors, and data analysts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    The duration, frequency, and intensity of interventions varied greatly across studies.

    “Furthermore, the duration, frequency, and intensity of interventions varied greatly across studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Published protocols for all studies included in the update were not identified through the search strategy.

    “However, published protocols for all of the studies included in this update were not identified through our search strategy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 159
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 296
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 5
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review found low-quality evidence for physical activity duration, with intervention ranges of 3 to 158 minutes and control ranges of 3 to 143 minutes across 23 studies and 15743 participants.

    “Physical activity duration (minutes engaged in physical activity) [follow-up: end of intervention to 4 years] Intervention: 3 to 158 Control: 3 to 143 15743 (23) ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low a”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The review found low-quality evidence for body mass index, with intervention ranges of 11.3 to 26.0 kg/m2 and control ranges of 12.0 to 26.1 kg/m2 across 27,567 participants.

    “Body mass index (BMI) (kg/m 2 ) [follow-up: end of intervention to 4 years] Intervention: 11.3 to 26.0 Control: 12.0 to 26.1 27,567”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review found low-quality evidence for physical activity rates, with intervention ranges of 53 to 92 and control ranges of 44 to 91 across 5 studies and 4123 participants.

    “Physical activity rates (% of participants physically active) [follow-up: end of intervention to 1 year] Intervention: 53 to 92 Control: 44 to 91 4123 (5) ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low a”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review found low-quality evidence for television viewing, with intervention group ranges of 85 to 285 minutes and control group ranges of 89 to 288 minutes across 16 studies and 9372 participants.

    “Television viewing (minutes spent watching TV) [follow-up: end of intervention to 4 years] Intervention: 85 to 285 Control: 89 to 288 9372 (16) ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low a”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The review found low-quality evidence for mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure, with intervention ranges of 96 to 138/50 to 73 mm Hg and control ranges of 97 to 139/50 to 76 mm Hg across 16 studies and 13,739 participants.

    “Mean systolic / diastolic blood pressure (mm Hg) [follow-up: end of intervention to 4 years] Intervention: 96 to 138 / 50 to 73 Control: 97 to 139 / 50 to 76 13,739 (16) ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low a”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The update's new trials did not substantively change the original review's findings or its recommendations for school-based physical activity and fitness promotion.

    “While addition of these new studies contributed further to the evidence-base, they did not substantively alter the findings of the original review or change recommendations made for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents within the school system.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The majority of studies evaluated outcomes immediately following the intervention (n = 34), with one study evaluating outcomes two weeks post intervention.

    “The majority of studies evaluated outcomes immediately following the intervention (n = 34), with one study evaluating outcomes two weeks post intervention”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    The update includes 14 of the original 26 studies.

    “Therefore, this update includes 14 of the original 26 studies”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The update includes 44 studies (14 from the original review and 30 from the update) and represents complete data for 36,593 study participants.

    “This update includes 44 studies (14 from the original review and 30 from the update), and represents complete data for 36,593 study participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Even BMI, measured most consistently, differed in the amount of clothing worn by participants.

    “Even BMI, which was measured most consistently across studies, differed in terms of the amount of clothing worn by participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The most common reasons original studies were judged not relevant were that relevant outcome data for children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 were not reported, and the intervention was not normally performed by public health professionals.

    “The most common reasons studies were judged as not relevant were data on relevant outcomes for children and adolescents (aged 6 to 18 years) were not reported, and the intervention was not an intervention normally performed by public health professionals.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    When new inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 12 of the original 26 studies were excluded: nine because they were not RCTs, one because the sample included only overweight or obese children, and two because the intervention was shorter than 12 weeks.

    “12 of the original 26 studies were excluded: nine because they were not RCTs”
    • Also stated in: § R E S U L T S Description of studies · plain
      “one was excluded because the study sample included overweight or obese children only”
    • Also stated in: § R E S U L T S Description of studies · plain
      “two others were excluded because the intervention was shorter than 12 weeks”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Fifteen studies focused primarily on grade school programs that included some parental involvement.

    “A number of studies (n = 15) focused primarily on grade school programs that included some parental involvement”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of studies distributed printed or audio-visual educational materials primarily to students, sometimes to parents.

    “The majority of studies also distributed printed or audio-visual educational materials primarily to students, but sometimes to parents as well”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The original review identified 13,841 records related to physical activity interventions with children and adolescents.

    “A total of 13,841 records related to physical activity interventions with children and adolescents were identified in the original review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    In some studies, control schools received other physical activity promotion interventions or standard PE curriculum.

    “However, in some studies the control schools received other physical activity promotion interventions provided through other health organizations or venues or standard PE curriculum.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Community-based interventions were used in conjunction with school-based interventions in about half of the studies.

    “Communitybased interventions, such as training sessions and workshops for parents and parent involvement in home-based physical activities (homework), were used in conjunction with school-based interventions in about half of the studies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of children were between nine and 11 years of age at baseline.

    “The majority of children were between nine to 11 years of age at baseline.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of 302 studies assessed for eligibility in the original review, 26 were included.

    “Of these, 302 studies were assessed for eligibility, and 26 were deemed of sufficient quality to be included in the original review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The most common reasons update studies were judged not relevant were that the design was not an RCT, relevant outcome data for children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 were not reported, or the intervention was not school based.

    “The most common reasons studies were judged as not relevant were: the design was not an RCT; data on relevant outcomes for children and adolescents (aged 6 to 18 years) were not reported; or the intervention was not school based.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    All studies included a control group representing either a school or group of schools from a different community, city, or state that did not receive the school-based intervention.

    “All studies included a control group that represented either a school or group of schools from a different community, city, or state that did not receive the school-based intervention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 285 unique studies assessed for eligibility in the update, 30 met all relevance criteria and were included.

    “Of these, 285 unique studies were assessed for eligibility.Of the 285 unique studies, 30 met all relevance criteria and were included in this update”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of included studies were conducted in the US (24), Australia (5), Belgium (3), China (2), and Greece (1).

    “The majority of studies were conducted in the US (24), Australia (5), Belgium (3), China (2), and Greece (1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Almost all studies implemented curricula focused on increasing time spent in physical activity and increasing knowledge about the benefits of an active lifestyle.

    “For example, almost all studies implemented curricula focused on increasing time spent in physical activity and on increasing knowledge about the benefits of an active lifestyle.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The update search from July 2007 to October 2011 identified 2,378 records related to physical activity interventions with children and adolescents.

    “In addition, the search strategy for this update from July 2007 to October 2011 identified 2378 records related to physical activity interventions with children and adolescents.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Physical health measures were generally more objective than behavioral measures, but there were still significant differences in how data were collected.

    “While the data collection procedures for the physical health measures (blood pressure, cholesterol, BMI, pulse, and maximal oxygen uptake (VO 2 max)) were generally more objective than the behavioral measures, there were still significant differences in how the data were collected.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All but 11 studies involved children 12 years of age and under at baseline, and three of those included participants who were 16 years at baseline.

    “All but 11 studies involved children 12 years of age and under at baseline, three of which included participants who were 16 years at baseline.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    None of the projects used the same combination of interventions with the same intensity, making each project unique.

    “Further, although all of the projects were primarily school-based, none of the projects used the same combination of interventions with the same intensity, making each project unique.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Several theoretical models were used to develop interventions, although in several studies it was unclear if a theoretical model had been used.

    “Several theoretical models were used to develop the physical activity interventions, although in several studies it was unclear if a theoretical model had been used.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The three most common intervention providers across the 44 included studies were classroom teachers (n = 28), members of the research team (n = 13), and PE teachers (n = 9).

    “The three most common intervention providers across the 44 included studies were classroom teachers (n = 28), members of the research team (n = 13), and PE teachers (n = 9).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    About a quarter of studies involved school-based activities other than school curricula.

    “About a quarter of the studies involved school-based activities other than school curricula”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Intervention duration varied from a minimum of 12 weeks to six years, with six studies reporting intervention periods of three years or greater.

    “The duration of the interventions varied greatly from a minimum of 12 weeks to six years, with six studies reporting intervention periods of three years or greater”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The most commonly used theories were social cognitive theory and the health-belief model, while self-determination theory, PRECEDE, social learning theory, and the transtheoretical model were used to a lesser extent.

    “The most commonly used theories were social cognitive theory and the health-belief model while self-determination theory, PRECEDE, social learning theory, and the transtheoretical model were used to a lesser extent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Colin-Ramirez 2010 and Dishman 2004 did not show a trend toward a positive effect, and data to assess this were not available for Petchers 1988.

    “The results reported by Colin-Ramirez 2010 and Dishman 2004 did not illustrate a trend toward a positive effect, and data to make this assessment were not available for Petchers 1988.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    In total, the update includes 23 studies reporting the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on physical activity duration.

    “In total this update includes 23 studies reporting the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on physical activity duration.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Most duration studies measured impact immediately post intervention, while one measured at two weeks, one at five months, one at six months, one at nine months, one at 12 months, and one at four years.

    “Most studies measured impact on physical activity duration immediately post intervention, while one study measured impact at two weeks post intervention, one at five months, one at six months, one at nine months, one at 12 months, and one at four years.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    For cholesterol, about half the studies used nonfasting blood samples and half used fasting blood samples.

    “For cholesterol, while the procedures for taking a blood sample and analyzing the sample were similar, about half the studies used nonfasting blood samples and the other half used fasting blood samples.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Interventions across all physical activity rate studies sought to increase MVPA in children during school hours, and all but one included changes to the curriculum.

    “Interventions across all studies sought to increase MVPA in children during school hours, and all but one study (Verstraete 2006) included changes to the curriculum.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Haerens 2006 reported a statistically significant effect overall, but subgroup analysis showed a significant effect for boys only.

    “However, while Haerens 2006 reported a statistically significant effect overall, further subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant effect for boys only.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Verstraete 2006 reported a statistically significant difference in MVPA among intervention children compared with control (P < 0.01), although no effect size or 95% CI was provided.

    “Verstraete 2006, who measured MVPA using accelerometers, also reported a statistically significant difference in moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) among children in the intervention group compared to those in the control group (P < 0.01), although an effect size and 95% CI were not provided.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For all but one study, allocation to treatment or intervention groups occurred at one point in time after study recruitment, and was unknown in one other.

    “For all but one study, allocation to treatment or intervention groups occurred at one point in time a er study recruitment, and was unknown in one other.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In three of the four studies reporting a positive effect on systolic blood pressure, the intervention was provided by research staff, and it was not stated in the fourth.

    “In three of the four studies reporting a positive effect the intervention was provided by members of the research staff (Angelopoulos 2009;Ewart 1998;Reed 2008), and was not stated in the fourth study (Bayne-Smith 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Two physical activity rate studies reported statistically significant positive effects (Simon 2004; Verstraete 2006), and three did not (Colin-Ramirez 2010; Dishman 2004; Petchers 1988).

    “Two of the studies reported statistically significant positive effects on physical activity rates of children (Simon 2004;Verstraete 2006), and three did not report statistically significant effects (Colin-Ramirez 2010;Dishman 2004;Petchers 1988).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Overall, eight of 32 studies reported statistically significant positive effects on BMI in favor of the intervention, while one study reported a statistically significant effect in favor of the control group (Weeks 2008).

    “Overall eight of the 32 studies reported statistically significant positive effects on BMI in favor of the intervention (Angelopoulos 2009;Barbeau 2007;Burke 1998;Haerens 2006;Kriemler 2010;Li 2010;Robinson 1999;Salmon 2008), while one study reported a statistically significant effect in favor of the control group (Weeks 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Confounders were adequately controlled in over 50% of studies, although for some studies important confounders such as socioeconomic status and parental education were not accounted for.

    “For the most part, confounders were adequately controlled in over 50% of studies although for some studies important confounders such as socioeconomic status and parental education were not accounted for.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among the two physical activity rate studies with significant positive effects, intervention duration ranged from three months to four school years; among those with no effect, duration ranged from one school year to 12 months.

    “Of the two studies reporting statistically significant positive effects the intervention ranged from three months (Verstraete 2006) to four school years (Simon 2004), while for those reporting no effect the intervention ranged from one school year to 12 months.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The sample size of duration studies ranged from 33 to 4019 participants.

    “The sample size of the studies ranged from 33 participants to 4019.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Two original review studies and six update studies measured duration of physical activity using accelerometers, although the majority relied on self-report.

    “Two studies in the original review (Ewart 1998;Stone 2003), and six in the update measured duration of physical activity using accelerometers”
    • Also stated in: § Duration of physical activity · plain
      “although the majority still relied on self report.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Studies were found to be free of selective reporting; however, because many did not have published protocols, it is impossible to know for certain if all outcomes were reported.

    “Studies were also found to be free of selective reporting; however, because many of these studies did not have published protocols it is impossible to know for certain if all outcomes were reported on.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Specific behavior outcomes included physical activity rates (five studies), duration of physical activity (23 studies), and time spent watching television (16 studies).

    “Specific outcomes related to behavior included: physical activity rates (five studies), duration of physical activity (23 studies), and time spent watching television (16 studies).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the remaining studies, it was either unclear whether methods were valid and reliable or methods subject to bias were used.

    “In the remaining studies it was either unclear whether methods were valid and reliable or methods were used that were subject to bias.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Of three duration studies evaluating impact on adolescent girls, one reported a statistically significant positive effect (Ewart 1998) and two did not (Bayne-Smith 2004; Neumark-Sztainer 2010).

    “One of three studies evaluating impact on adolescent girls reported a statistically significant positive effect (Ewart 1998) and two did not (Bayne-Smith 2004;Neumark-Sztainer 2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In very few cases were measures taken to account for clustering effects within schools, and just over a third of studies (n = 16) reported conducting an ITT analysis.

    “Furthermore, in very few cases were measures taken to account for clustering effects within schools and only just over a third of studies (n = 16) reported that they conducted an ITT analysis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The intervention provider in the majority of duration studies was classroom teachers; other providers included PE teachers, research workers, peers, and physical activity instructors.

    “The intervention provider in the majority of studies was classroom teachers; however, other intervention providers included PE teachers, research workers, peers, and physical activity instructors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The magnitude of effect across duration studies reporting statistically significant effects varied from just under five minutes to 45 minutes more per week of MVPA, with CIs from 1.4 minutes to approximately 90 minutes more per week.

    “The magnitude of effect varied across studies reporting statistically significant effects from just under five min to 45 min more per week of MVPA, and the CIs ranged from as little as 1.4 min to approximately 90 min more per week of MVPA.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All but one physical activity rate study evaluated impact immediately following the intervention, while Colin-Ramirez 2010 evaluated impact one year post intervention.

    “All but one study evaluated impact on physical activity rates immediately following the intervention, while Colin-Ramirez 2010, evaluated impact one year post intervention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Only one of 10 studies reported a statistically significant positive effect on mean blood cholesterol (Walter 1988), and in that study only schools in the intervention group from a higher socioeconomic status reported a significant positive effect.

    “Only one of the 10 studies reported a statistically significant positive effect on mean blood cholesterol (Walter 1988), and in that study only schools in the intervention group from a higher socioeconomic status reported a statistically significant positive effect.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Among the two duration studies including both grade school and secondary school children, one did not report statistically significant effects (Lubans 2009), while the second reported a statistically significant effect in favor of the control group (Weeks 2008).

    “Among the two studies including both grade school and secondary school children, one did not report statistically significant effects (Lubans 2009), while the second reported a statistically significant effect in favor of the control group (Weeks 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In four of the studies reporting a statistically significant positive effect on BMI, the intervention providers were classroom teachers, while in two studies PE teachers were primarily responsible.

    “In four of the studies reporting a statistically significant positive effect the intervention providers were classroom teachers (Barbeau 2007;Burke 1998;Haerens 2006;Robinson 1999), while in two studies PE teachers were primarily responsible for implementing the intervention (Kriemler 2010;Salmon 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Simon 2004 reported a statistically significant increase in physical activity rates in the intervention group compared with control (P < 0.0001), with intervention children almost three times more likely to be physically active outside school (OR 2.74; 95% CI 2.01 to 3.75).

    “Simon 2004 reported a statistically significant increase in physical activity rates in those exposed to the intervention compared to those in the control group (P < 0.0001), and found that intervention group children were almost three times more likely to be physically active outside of school compared to controls (OR 2.74).The 95% CI ranged from 2.01 to 3.75.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The sample sizes of the five physical activity rate studies ranged from 235 to 2111 participants.

    “The sample sizes of the five studies ranged from 235 to 2111 participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    In total, the update includes five studies evaluating the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on physical activity rates.

    “In total, this update includes five studies evaluating the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on physical activity rates.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Intervention providers varied widely, including research staff, teachers, PE teachers, nutritionists, and peers.

    “Intervention providers also varied widely from research staff, to teachers, to physical education (PE) teachers, nutritionists, and peers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Seven of the 16 studies found statistically significant positive effects on television viewing, and one found a statistically significant effect favoring the control group.

    “In total seven studies reported statistically significant positive effects on time spent watching television (Burke 1998;Gentile 2009;Jones 2008;Robinson 1999;Simon 2004;Singh 2009;Webber 2008), and one reported a statistically significant effect in favor of the control group (Salmon 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The majority of duration studies reported results for a mixed sample of boys and girls combined, two reported results for boys and girls separately, and three included girls only.

    “The majority of studies reported results for a mixed sample of boys and girls combined, two reported results for boys and girls separately, and three included girls only.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The remaining 12 studies did not report statistically significant effects on diastolic blood pressure, and no studies showed a trend toward a positive effect.

    “The remaining 12 studies did not report statistically significant effects on mean diastolic blood pressure, and no studies showed a trend toward a positive effect.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All physical activity rate studies reported results for a mixed sample of boys and girls combined, except Dishman 2004, which included girls only.

    “All studies reported results for a mixed sample of boys and girls combined, except for Dishman 2004, who included girls only.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For VO2 max, half of the six studies measured blood gases following exertion, while the other half used pulse rate recovery as a proxy.

    “Finally, for the six studies measuring VO 2 max half measured blood gases following exertion, while the other half used pulse rate recovery as a proxy for maximal oxygen uptake.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In some duration studies, intervention participants engaged in MVPA longer than control participants at follow-up; in others, intervention participants had a smaller decrease in duration compared with controls.

    “In some studies participants in the intervention group engaged in MVPA longer than control group participants at follow-up, while in other studies, those in the intervention group had a smaller decrease in duration of physical activity in comparison to control group participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Another limitation was unit of allocation errors; in some studies allocation was by institution or classroom but assessment occurred at the individual level.

    “Another limitation of this literature was unit of allocation errors.In some of the studies allocation was o en by institution (e.g.school) or classroom, but assessment occurred at the level of the individual.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    One of the two physical activity rate studies with significant positive effects used accelerometers to measure physical activity, while all other studies used self-report.

    “One of the two studies reporting a statistically significant positive effect used accelerometers to measure physical activity rates (Verstraete 2006), while all other studies used self-report.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The intervention in all duration studies reporting statistically significant effects included changes to school curricula, and in many studies printed educational materials.

    “The intervention in all studies reporting statistically significant effects included changes to school curricula, and in many studies printed educational materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the five physical activity rate studies, four focused on grade school children only, and one reported on grade school and secondary school students.

    “Of these, four studies focused on grade school children only”
    • Also stated in: § Physical activity rates · plain
      “and one reported on grade school and secondary school students”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All eight studies reporting statistically significant positive effects on BMI used printed education materials, three included community-based strategies, and three included education sessions.

    “All studies used printed education materials, while three studies included community-based strategies (Burke 1998;Haerens 2006;Kriemler 2010), and three included education sessions (Burke 1998;Kriemler 2010;Salmon 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of the 23 duration studies, 17 reported results for grade school children only, two included grade school and secondary school students, and three reported results for adolescents only.

    “Of these, 17 studies reported results for grade school children only”
    • Also stated in: § Duration of physical activity · plain
      “two included grade school and secondary school students”
    • Also stated in: § Duration of physical activity · plain
      “and three reported results for adolescents only”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Many studies attempted to evaluate intervention integrity, and some conducted process evaluations in addition to evaluating effectiveness.

    “Finally, many studies attempted to evaluate the extent to which the intervention was implemented as intended (intervention integrity), and some conducted process evaluations in addition to evaluating intervention effectiveness.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    School curriculum was a component in all studies reporting statistically significant effects on television viewing, with printed education materials, education sessions, and community-based strategies implemented in almost all such studies.

    “School curriculum was a component in all studies reporting statistically significant effects, with printed education materials, education sessions, and community-based strategies being implemented in almost all studies reporting statistically significant effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Among grade-school-only duration studies, 12 reported statistically significant positive effects, two of which used accelerometers.

    “Among the studies evaluating duration of physical activity among grade school children only, 12 studies reported statistically significant positive effects”
    • Also stated in: § Duration of physical activity · plain
      “two of which measured duration of physical activity with accelerometers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Blood pressure measures were least consistent, varying between manual mercury sphygmomanometer and electronic Dinamap, timing 5 to 15 minutes after active periods, and averaging of three or five measures.

    “Blood pressure measures were least consistent where in some studies blood pressure was taken manually using a mercury sphygmomanometer, and in others electronically using a Dinamap machine.”
    • Also stated in: § Figure 3. (Continued) · plain
      “the timing of when blood pressure was measured differed significantly across studies with timing varying between 5 and 15 min following active periods during school hours.”
    • Also stated in: § Figure 3. (Continued) · plain
      “in some studies the average of three measures taken one minute apart were used, in others five measures were averaged, and in others the second and third of three measures were averaged.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Specific physical health outcomes included mean systolic blood pressure (16 studies), mean diastolic blood pressure (16 studies), blood cholesterol level (10 studies), BMI (32 studies), VO2 max (six studies), and pulse rate (six studies).

    “Specific outcomes of physical health status included: mean systolic blood pressure (16 studies), mean diastolic blood pressure (16 studies), blood cholesterol level (10 studies), BMI (32 studies), VO 2 max (six studies), and pulse rate (six studies).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Studies not reporting a significant effect on systolic blood pressure used similar combinations of interventions but tended to use classroom and PE teachers more often and were implemented for longer periods compared with studies reporting significant positive effects.

    “Generally, the studies not reporting a statistically significant effect on mean systolic blood pressure used similar combinations of interventions, but tended to use classroom Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PE teachers more o en, and tended to be implemented for longer periods of time, in comparison to studies reporting statistically significant positive effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    In this update, 16 studies evaluated the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on television viewing.

    “In total this update includes 16 studies evaluating the impact of school-based physical activity interventions on television viewing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There is also some limited evidence in this update that positive effects are maintained in the longer term (six months to four years), although only a small number of studies measured outcomes beyond the end of the intervention.

    “There is also some limited evidence in this update that these positive effects are maintained in the longer term, (i.e. six months to four years), although only a small number of studies measured outcomes beyond the end of the intervention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    In this review there is some limited evidence to suggest that school-based physical activity interventions may have a positive effect on physical activity rates in children, meaning there was some limited evidence that school-based interventions were effective in increasing the proportion of children who engaged in MVPA during school hours.

    “Also, in this review there is some limited evidence to suggest that school-based physical activity interventions may have a positive effect on physical activity rates in children, meaning there was some limited evidence to suggest that school-based interventions were effective in increasing the proportion of children who engaged in MVPA during school hours.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For duration of physical activity, 14 of 23 studies showed a positive effect, and 5 of those used an accelerometer to measure duration.

    “For this outcome, 14 of 23 studies demonstrated a positive effect, and of those five studies measured duration of physical activity with an accelerometer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    At this time there is some limited evidence to suggest that school-based physical activity interventions have a small to moderate impact on behavioral outcomes related to physical activity as well as on one physical health status measure.

    “At this time there is some limited evidence to suggest that schoolbased physical activity interventions have a small to moderate impact on behavioral outcomes related to physical activity as well as on one physical health status measure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Studies reporting a positive effect on VO2max made changes to the school curriculum, two also included printed education materials, and one included education sessions.

    “Studies reporting a positive effect made changes to the school curriculum, two also included printed education materials, and one included education sessions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Generally, the results of this update are for the most part unchanged from those reported in the original review, with two exceptions.

    “Generally the results of this update are for the most part unchanged from those reported in the original review with two exceptions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    There is only limited evidence that boys and girls respond differently to school-based interventions as well as different components of interventions from the studies included in this review.

    “There is only limited evidence that boys and girls respond differently to school-based interventions as well as different components of interventions from the studies included in this review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The results illustrate a positive improvement in VO2max across studies ranging from 1.6 to 3.7 mL/kg per min, while a fourth study reported a lower heart rate by 4 beats/min after strenuous exercise following the intervention.

    “The results illustrate a positive improvement in VO 2 max across studies ranging from 1.6 to 3.7 mL/ kg per min, while a fourth study reported a lower heart rate by 4 beats/min a er strenuous exercise following the intervention.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In Bush 1989, total serum cholesterol differed significantly between groups during intervention years 1 and 2 but not in years 3 and 4.

    “During intervention (year 1) 187 189 P < 0.02 During intervention (year 2) 189 189 P = 0.418 During intervention (year 3) 171 167 P = 0.432 Bush 1989 End of intervention (year 4) 431 boys and girls 177 180 P = 0.348”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bush 1989 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    In Martinez 2008, systolic blood pressure at the end of the 9-month intervention did not differ significantly between groups (102 vs 103 mmHg; P = 0.96; mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -1.7 to 1.8).

    “Martinez 2008 Girls End of intervention (9 months) 1044 boys and girls 102 103 P = 0.96 0.1 (95% CI -1.7 to 1.8)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Martinez 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    In Luepker 1996, systolic blood pressure at the end of intervention year 3 did not differ significantly between groups (114 vs 114 mmHg; P = 0.71).

    “Luepker 1996 End of intervention (year 3) 4019 boys and girls 114 114 P = 0.71”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Luepker 1996 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    This scope limitation led to the exclusion of 12 of the 26 studies that had been included in the original review.

    “This resulted in 12 of the 26 studies included in the original review being excluded in this update.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The 2011 update did not alter the conclusions and recommendations of the original review.

    “This update has not impacted the conclusions and recommendations from the original review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Applying the new relevance criteria led to the exclusion of 12 studies from the original review in the update: 9 were not RCTs, 2 had interventions shorter than 12 weeks, and 1 included only overweight or obese children.

    “This resulted in 12 studies from the original review being excluded from the update: 9 because they were not RCTs”
    • Also stated in: § Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · plain
      “2 because the intervention was shorter than twelve weeks (Eliakim 1996; Fardy 1996); and 1 because the study sample included overweight or obese children only (Carrel 2005a)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    It is hard to increase children's activity because many influences-personal, institutional, community, policy, and environmental-shape their behavior.

    “Increasing physical activity among children and adolescents is difficult as behavior is influenced by several factors including: personal factors; institutional, community, and public policy; and the physical environment (CIHR 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites CIHR 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Even though PE is usually part of the curriculum, it may be scheduled rarely and students are often not very active during it.

    “Although most schools require PE as part of their curriculum, PE classes may occur infrequently and children are o en relatively inactive in them (McKenzie 1995;Pate 2006;Simons-Morton 1990;Simons-Morton 1994).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites McKenzie 1995 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Pate 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Simons-Morton 1990 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Programs in schools can address children regardless of future chronic disease risk and can raise both knowledge and behavior that support healthier living.

    “School-based interventions can target simultaneously, children both at risk and not at risk for future chronic diseases, and can increase both knowledge and behavior conducive to healthier lifestyles.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    School-based activity promotion may lower population chronic disease because children spend many waking hours at or going to school and in many countries attend until adolescence.

    “Given school-aged children spend a significant amount of their wakeful hours either in transit to or in the school setting, and that in many countries, all children attend school until they reach adolescence, school-based physical activity promotion interventions have potential to reduce population-wide chronic diseases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Although schools by themselves cannot eliminate inactivity, they can serve as the main community resource for helping students meet recommended activity levels.

    “While the schools alone cannot solve the problem of inactivity, they do have the potential to become the central element in a community that ensures students participate in the recommended amount of time engaged in physical activity (Koplan 2005;Pate 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Koplan 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Pate 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    School programs reach children across risk levels, including those lacking play space, and can reduce stigma for those at risk.

    “Schools provide benefit to children from all risk groups (Harrell 1996;WHO 2004a), particularly those with limited or no access to play areas (McKenzie 1996); and avoids stigmatization of at-risk children (Harrell 1998).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Harrell 1996 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites WHO 2004a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites McKenzie 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    School-based activity has been linked indirectly with academic outcomes such as reduced dropout, improved conduct, self-esteem, engagement, and attention.

    “Physical activity in schools has also been shown to be indirectly associated with academic achievement including lower drop-out rates, better classroom behavior, self-esteem and engagement in school, and on-task behavior (Mahar 2006;Trudeau 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Mahar 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Trudeau 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Younger children are generally more active than older children and adolescents.

    “older children and adolescents less active than younger children”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Adams 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites CDC 1997

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kelder 1995b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Schools are a particularly suitable setting for population-wide activity programs, since no other institution reaches children as strongly during their first 20 years.

    “The school setting is an ideal environment for population-based physical activity interventions as no other institution has as much influence on children during their first two decades of life (Story 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Story 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Several troubling trends in schools coincide with rising obesity: less active commuting, shorter recess, and fewer students enrolled in PE.

    “Worrisome trends in the school setting are occurring concurrently with the increasing prevalence of obesity including a decline in physically active transport to and from school, recess duration, and enrolment in PE classes (Pate 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Pate 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Signs of coronary disease, namely fatty streaks in the coronary arteries, have been detected in overweight teenagers and in autopsies of children.

    “atherosclerotic fatty streaks in the coronary arteries, indicative of coronary heart disease, have been found in overweight adolescents (Haque 2008), and postmortem in children (Berenson 1992).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Haque 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Berenson 1992 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Disagreements in risk of bias assessment were resolved through discussion until consensus was reached.

    “Disagreements were resolved through discussion until consensus was reached.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Eligible programs had to be public-health relevant rather than physician- or clinic-run, feasible for local public health staff, school-based, and intended to raise activity and fitness.

    “The intervention had to be relevant to public health practice (meaning the focus was on health promotion from an individual or population-wide perspective, was not physician or clinic based)”
    • Also stated in: § Types of studies · plain
      “the intervention was implemented in a school setting and was aimed at increasing physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    A narrative summary was used because the studies differed greatly in participants, programs, and outcome measures.

    “The results were summarized narratively due to wide variations in the populations, interventions evaluated, and outcomes measured.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Studies focused only on subgroups such as obese or inactive children were excluded from the update, which removed a few studies from the original review.

    “Studies not aimed at the general population (e.g.studies including obese children only, or only low-active children) were excluded from this update.Again this resulted in a small number of studies included in the original review being excluded in the update.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    It remained uncertain from those reviews how much the school context mattered for effectiveness and how much activity by itself improved outcomes like blood pressure, lipids, weight, and fitness.

    “In both reviews it is unclear what specific contribution the school setting had on intervention effectiveness as well as the individual contribution of physical activity on improved health status measures, such as blood pressure, blood lipids, weight, and fitness measures.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Summerbell 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Thomas 2004a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Although the authors recognize that post hoc questions may be biased, they considered the revised eligibility criteria necessary to secure the strongest evidence for their research question.

    “The review authors are aware that post hoc questions are susceptible to bias (Higgins 2011); however, in light of the growing body of literature on the effectiveness of school-based physical activity promotion interventions, we believe the changes in inclusion and exclusion criteria were necessary to ensure the most rigorous evidence answering our research question was included in this update.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Higgins 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The update set a minimum intervention length of 12 weeks, removing some shorter studies that had been in the original review.

    “Studies had to have at a minimum an intervention duration of at least 12 weeks otherwise they were excluded from the update.Again this resulted is some studies included in the original review being excluded from the update.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Data were extracted only for outcomes for which some degree of reliability and validity was demonstrated.

    “The reliability and validity of all data collection measures were also assessed and data extracted only for those outcomes for which some degree of reliability and validity was demonstrated.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Any disagreements were resolved by discussion to consensus.

    “Where discrepancies existed, discussion occurred until consensus was reached.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    For this update, eligible studies were restricted to randomized trials whose intervention ran for 12 weeks or longer.

    “Furthermore, in this update we included data only from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum intervention duration of 12 weeks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When students learn about activity and get opportunities to be active at school, they are expected to form healthier habits that could persist into adult life.

    “and by providing students with both knowledge and the opportunity to be more active during the school day, children will develop healthier behaviors that may track in adulthood.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because interventions, populations, and outcomes varied, statistical combination across studies was inappropriate, so results were synthesized narratively.

    “Variation in the interventions, populations, and outcomes measured made it inappropriate to combine the results statistically across studies, therefore the results are synthesized narratively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For the update, all studies from the original review and all newly identified studies were assessed independently for risk of bias by two of three review authors.

    “For the update all studies from the original review as well as studies identified for this update were assessed independently for risk of bias by two of three review authors (MD, RL, KD).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Risk of bias judgments were made separately for seven domains.

    “Critical assessments were made separately for each of seven domains with judgments of low risk of bias, high risk of bias, and unclear risk of bias”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Additional studies were sought by examining bibliographies of included papers and reviews and by asking experts and original authors.

    “We identified additional studies by searching the reference lists of included studies and (systematic) reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessment reports.”
    • Also stated in: § Contacting experts · plain
      “Experts in the field of physical activity promotion in children and adolescents were contacted with a view to seeking additional references.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    For the update, three review authors independently extracted population and intervention characteristics for all new studies using standard data extraction templates.

    “For this update three review authors (MD, RL, KD) independently abstracted relevant population and intervention characteristics for all new studies using standard data extraction templates”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Relevance screening and data extraction were done by two reviewers working independently with standardized instruments.

    “Standardized tools were used by two independent reviewers to assess each study for relevance and for data extraction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Searches covered multiple databases from 1985 through July 2007 for the original review and from July 2007 through October 2011 for the update.

    “For the original review the following databases were searched from 1985 to July 2007: MEDLINE, BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL).For the updated review, the same databases were searched again to capture studies published between July 2007 to October 2011.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Risk of bias was evaluated for every study using the Cochrane Handbook's guidance.

    “In addition, each study was assessed for risk of bias as specified in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Both prior reviews covered complex programs that addressed diet and activity at the same time and were delivered in several settings, including schools, communities, and public places.

    “In both the Summerbell 2005 and Thomas 2004a reviews, interventions were multifaceted, meaning the interventions targeted multiple behaviors including diet and physical activity simultaneously, and that they were implemented congruently in multiple settings such as the community, schools, and public places.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Summerbell 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Thomas 2004a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    One prior review, Summerbell 2005, looked at obesity prevention programs for children; another, Thomas 2004a, evaluated approaches to healthy weight promotion in young people.

    “For example, Summerbell 2005 explored the impact of interventions to prevent obesity in children, and Thomas 2004a assessed the impact of strategies to promote healthy body weight in children and adolescents.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Summerbell 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Thomas 2004a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Eligible participants were school students aged 6-18, including healthy, overweight, and obese children; studies treating a specific serious illness or comorbidity with activity were excluded.

    “Studies that included school-attending children and adolescents between the ages of 6 to 18 years were included in this review.This included all otherwise healthy children and adolescents whether they were overweight, obese, or not.We excluded studies where participants received a physical activity intervention as part of a treatment regimen for a specific critical illness or comorbidity (e.g.di”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For the update, eligibility was narrowed to randomized trials, so some non-randomized studies from the original review were dropped.

    “the inclusion/exclusion criteria were modified to include only those studies that were RCTs.This change in inclusion criterion resulted in a number of non-RCTs included in the original review being excluded from the update.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Studies were not eligible if all intervention activities took place outside school.

    “We excluded studies when the intervention was conducted entirely outside of the school setting (e.g.community setting, public place, recreation facility, physician office, camp setting).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is possible that some duration studies with smaller sample sizes were underpowered to detect statistically significant changes in physical activity duration.

    “However, it is possible that some studies with smaller sample sizes were underpowered to detect statistically significant changes in physical activity duration.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    All 16 studies measuring television viewing used self-report.

    “All studies measured television viewing through self-report.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It is questionable whether the observed reductions in television viewing would result in reduced risk for chronic diseases.

    “drawing into question whether these reductions would result in reduced risk for the development of chronic diseases.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Almost all recent reviews show that school-based physical activity interventions increase children's and adolescents' time in MVPA, and in some cases this translates into improved fitness measures.

    “Almost all recent reviews illustrate that school-based physical activity interventions do result in children and adolescents spending more time engaged in MVPA and in some instances this translates into improved fitness measures.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Lack of change in leisure-time physical activity or fitness has been attributed most often to inadequate dose, poor compliance, inattention to multiple risk factors and overly simplistic interventions, methodological errors in fitness measurement, and failure to control confounders.

    “Lack of change in leisure time physical activity or physical fitness, in turn, has been attributed most o en to issues of: a) inadequate dose (Tolfrey 2000); b) poor compliance (Baranowski 1990); c) inattention to the multiplicity of risk factors for physical inactivity and subsequent overly simplistic, unidimensional interventions;”
    • Also stated in: § Potential biases in the review process · plain
      “d) methodologic errors in measuring fitness (e.g.assessing heart rate only a er, as opposed to during, activity); and e) a failure to control for potentially confounding variables (Tolfrey 2000).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Tolfrey 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Baranowski 1990 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The results must be interpreted cautiously and likely overestimate the true treatment effect.

    “As such the results must be interpreted cautiously and likely overestimate the true treatment effect.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, allocation was concealed because all participants were allocated at a single point after recruitment, so group assignment was unknown at recruitment.

    “Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This represents an important risk of bias for this literature and likely resulted in either overestimating the treatment effect or finding a statistically significant positive effect where one did not exist.

    “This represents an important risk of bias for this literature and likely resulted in either overestimating the treatment effect or finding a statistically significant positive effect where one did not exist.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Hillsdon 2005 reported similar results among adults for physical activity promotion interventions.

    “An additional review by Hillsdon 2005 also reported similar results among adults for interventions to promote physical activity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hillsdon 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationown data

    A more comprehensive approach (e.g., home, community, policy) may be needed.

    “a more comprehensive approach (e.g.home, community, policy) is needed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Community-based strategies have been shown to be somewhat effective in promoting healthy behavior among populations.

    “Community-based strategies have been shown to be somewhat effective in promoting healthy behavior among populations (Dobbins 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dobbins 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Searches could not be conducted in non-English databases, so articles published in Chinese not indexed in English databases were not eligible.

    “Most notably, it was not possible to conduct searches in databases that are not English.”
    • Also stated in: § Potential biases in the review process · plain
      “For example articles published in Chinese that were not indexed in English language databases were not eligible for inclusion.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, all outcomes specified a priori were reported, giving low risk of reporting bias.

    “Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    It is likely that some studies not reporting significant effects on pulse rate were underpowered.

    “It is likely that some of the studies were underpowered to detect a statistically significant effect.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Empirical evidence and theoretical frameworks suggest that CVD risk reduction strategies should target multiple high-risk behaviors simultaneously.

    “Although empirical evidence (Thomas 1999) and theoretical frameworks suggest that CVD risk reduction strategies should target multiple high-risk behaviors simultaneously”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thomas 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    While it is possible that some studies were missed by the search strategy, the review anticipates that this number would be small, and that the results have not been significantly impacted.

    “While it is possible that some studies were missed by our search strategy, we anticipate that this number would be small, and that the results of our review have not been significantly impacted upon.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The review team may have overestimated treatment effects or interpreted results more positively than warranted.

    “Given a meta-analysis was not conducted, it is possible that the review team may have overestimated treatment effects when interpreting the results across studies.”
    • Also stated in: § Potential biases in the review process · hedged
      “While efforts were Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews undertaken to minimize this bias (multiple review authors were involved in interpreting the results and provided comments on dra s of this update) it is still possible that we have interpreted the results to be more positive than they actually are.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The studies included in this review are generally applicable to public health practice in developed countries.

    “The studies included in this review are generally applicable to public health practice in developed countries.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Significant improvements in the quality of the evidence were observed from the original review to this update.

    “However, on a positive note, significant improvements in the quality of the evidence were observed from the original review to this update.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The evidence suggests that effective school-based interventions include some combination of school curricula, printed educational materials, and likely, though there is less evidence to support it, educational sessions, physical activity specific sessions, and community-based initiatives.

    “The evidence also suggests that effective school-based interventions include some combination of school curricula, printed educational materials, and likely, though there is less evidence to support it, educational sessions, physical activity specific sessions, and community-based initiatives.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This likely contributed to an overestimation of the treatment effect, given those engaging in the intervention may have been more likely to complete the study and data collection, and therefore biasing the results toward a positive effect.

    “This as well likely contributed to an overestimation of the treatment effect, given those engaging in the intervention may have been more likely to complete the study and data collection, and therefore biasing the results toward a positive effect.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In only nine of 25 studies were more objective outcome measurements obtained from pedometers or accelerometers on time spent engaged in physical activity, and only one of 14 studies did not rely on self-report to measure time spent watching television.

    “In only nine of 25 studies were more objective outcome measurements obtained from pedometers or accelerometers on time spent engaged in physical activity, and only one of 14 studies did not rely on selfreport to measure time spent watching television.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    While the majority of outcomes were assessed using measures with at least some degree of demonstrated reliability and validity, most behavioral outcomes were measured through self-report (except for a small, albeit growing, number of studies using accelerometers), while physical health status outcomes were measured through more objective means.

    “While the majority of outcomes were assessed using measures with at least some degree of demonstrated reliability and validity, most of the behavioral outcomes were measured through selfreport (except for a small, albeit growing, number of studies using accelerometers), while the physical health status outcomes were measured through more objective means.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The effect reported by Waters 2011 was generally small, with significant heterogeneity across studies.

    “However, it is important to point out that there was significant heterogeneity of results across studies and that overall, the magnitude of effect reported by Waters 2011 generally was small.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Waters 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, the allocation sequence was generated with random digits, giving low risk of selection bias.

    “Comment: random digits used to develop allocation sequence”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    It is possible that one of the two studies not reporting a statistically significant effect on VO2max was underpowered to detect a significant difference.

    “It is possible that one of the two studies not reporting a statistically significant effect was underpowered to detect a significant differences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Bias may have been introduced during the review process despite strategies to reduce bias.

    “It is possible that bias was introduced during the review process despite the implementation of strategies to reduce bias.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    At best the evidence is of moderate risk of bias, and therefore must be used cautiously.

    “However, at best the evidence is of moderate risk of bias, and therefore must be used cautiously.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    A comprehensive search of RCTs was conducted.

    “A comprehensive search of RCTs was conducted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, every relevant confounder was controlled for.

    “Comment: all relevant confounders were controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Katz 2009 found a positive effect on weight in a meta-analysis of school-based obesity prevention interventions and argued for ongoing school-based intervention.

    “Another meta-analysis of school-based obesity prevention interventions found a positive effect on weight, and clearly argued the need for ongoing school-based intervention (Katz 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Katz 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    A number of studies experienced high attrition rates as well as incomplete outcome data.

    “Furthermore, a number of studies experienced high attrition rates as well as incomplete outcome data.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Trudeau 2008 reported that fitness measures improved in children in general.

    “Furthermore, a review of studies evaluating the impact of physical activity interventions reported increased physical activity among adolescent girls (Brown 2009), and another found a positive effect on fitness measures in children generally (Trudeau 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Trudeau 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    It is not clear if these findings are applicable to low- and middle-income countries, particularly where the public health sector system or school systems (or both) are different, or when cultural differences are taken into account.

    “However, it is not clear if these findings are applicable to low-and middle-income countries particularly among those where the public health sector system or school systems (or both) are different, or when cultural differences are taken into account.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Bush 1989, the review judged data collection methods as unclear risk because there was insufficient data to determine reliability and validity.

    “Unclear risk Comment: insufficient data to determine reliability and validity”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bush 1989 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In the Bush 1989 trial, attrition bias was at high risk because only 431 participants (41.4%) underwent rescreening two years after the cohort was formed, and students who moved between control and intervention schools were dropped from analysis.

    “Only 431 (41.4% of participants were rescreened 2 years after forming the cohort.Students who had moved from a control to an intervention school or vice versa were dropped from the analysis”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, all outcomes specified a priori were reported, giving low risk of reporting bias.

    “Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because all relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged data collection methods as unclear risk because the authors stated that reliability and validity of the questionnaire had been reported previously and validated for a Spanish population, but no details were provided other than a citation.

    “Unclear risk Comment: authors state reliability and validity of questionnaire has been reported previously and validated for a Spanish population, but no details provided other than a citation”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because no description of the randomization process was given.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In the Burke 1998 trial, every relevant confounder was accounted for.

    “Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In the Bush 1989 trial, selective reporting bias was at low risk.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, the reliability and validity of most outcomes were not stated, giving high risk for data collection methods.

    “Comment: reliability and validity of most outcomes not stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bush 1989 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bush 1989 trial, allocation was concealed because all participants were allocated at a single point after recruitment, so group assignment was unknown at recruitment.

    “Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, although most confounders did not differ significantly, a few small differences remained unaccounted for, giving high risk of confounding.

    “Comment: while there were no significant differences in most confounders, there were a few small differences which were not accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, allocation was concealed because all participants were allocated at a single point after recruitment, so group assignment was unknown at recruitment.

    “Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Burke 1998 trial, all outcomes specified a priori were reported, giving low risk of reporting bias.

    “Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because no description of the randomization process was given.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, the randomization process was not reported, leaving risk of selection bias unclear.

    “Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Burke 1998 trial, outcome data were complete, giving low risk of attrition bias.

    “Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Burke 1998 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, all outcomes specified a priori were reported, giving low risk of reporting bias.

    “Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Burke 1998 trial, the reliability and validity of most outcomes were not stated, giving high risk for data collection methods.

    “Comment: reliability and validity of most outcomes not stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, the randomization process was not reported, leaving risk of selection bias unclear.

    “Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, all outcomes specified a priori were reported, giving low risk of reporting bias.

    “Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged blinding as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged incomplete outcome data as high risk because 24 subjects failed to attend the post-test data collection and were not included in the data analyses.

    “High risk Quote:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because relevant confounders were controlled, including age, ethnicity, and body mass index.

    “Low risk Comment: relevant confounders were controlled including age, ethnicity, body mass index”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged blinding as low risk because blinding was done where possible: research assistants were blinded to condition for measurement of primary and secondary outcomes and for data entry.

    “Low risk Comment: blinding was done where possible -research assistants were blinded to condition for measurement of the primary and secondary outcomes and for data entry”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged incomplete outcome data as low risk because missing data for physical activity at follow-up were imputed.

    “Low risk Comment: missing data for physical activity at follow-up were imputed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Burke 1998 trial, the randomization process was not reported, leaving risk of selection bias unclear.

    “Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Bush 1989, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because a multiple regression analysis adjusted the observed score difference between control and intervention groups for confounders.

    “Low risk Quote: Multiple regression analysis was used to adjust the observed difference in scores between the control and intervention groups for these confounders”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bush 1989 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, allocation was concealed because all participants were allocated at a single point after recruitment, so group assignment was unknown at recruitment.

    “Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In the Angelopoulos 2009 trial, the data collection methods were valid and reliable.

    “Comment: data collection methods valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, important variables such as socioeconomic status were not assessed or controlled for, giving high risk of confounding.

    “Comment: important variables like socioeconomic status not assessed or controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Bush 1989 trial, no description of the randomization process was given, leaving risk of selection bias unclear.

    “Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, allocation was concealed because it took place after testing and the next participant's group was not determined at study entry.

    “Comment: allocation occurred after testing, therefore concealed.It was not known or determined at time of entry to study which group the next participant would go”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, attrition bias was at low risk, though it was unclear whether intention-to-treat analysis was used at the 9-month follow-up.

    “Comment: unsure if intention to treat conducted at 9-month follow-up”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, the reliability and validity of most outcomes were not stated, giving high risk for data collection methods.

    “Comment: reliability and validity of most outcomes not stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Bush 1989, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bush 1989 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all schools were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all schools were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, incomplete outcome data were not addressed, leaving risk of attrition bias unclear.

    “Comment: incomplete outcome data not addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged incomplete outcome data as low risk because there was an 80% participation rate, with no details or reasons given for attrition.

    “Low risk Comment: 80% participation rate, no details/reasons given for attrition”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged blinding as high risk because data were collected through self report from participants.

    “High risk Comment: data collected through self report from participants”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, the randomization process was not reported, leaving risk of selection bias unclear.

    “Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged blinding as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Burke 1998 trial, allocation was concealed because all participants were allocated at a single point after recruitment, so group assignment was unknown at recruitment.

    “Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, the data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Barbeau 2007 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dishman 2004, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dishman 2004 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, not all relevant confounders were accounted for, giving high risk of confounding.

    “Comment: not all relevant confounders accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged confounders as not controlled (high risk) because confounders were not addressed.

    “High risk Comment: confounders not addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Araujo-Soares 2009 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Colin-Ramirez 2010, the review judged selective reporting as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Colin-Ramirez 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In the Bayne-Smith 2004 trial, blinding was probably not carried out, leaving performance and detection bias at unclear risk.

    “Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Donnelly 2009, the review judged incomplete outcome data as low risk because there was 2.5% missing data, not likely to affect results.

    “Low risk Comment: there was 2.5% missing data, not likely to affect results”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Donnelly 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged blinding as low risk because technicians taking measurements were reported not aware of girls' experimental status.

    “Low risk Comment: technicians taking measurements were reported not aware of girls' experimental status”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because all relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because all relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Jones 2008, the review judged incomplete outcome data as high risk because incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed.

    “High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Kipping 2008, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk, quoting that random allocation to intervention or control school was concealed and done by one of the authors.

    “Unclear risk Quote:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kipping 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged incomplete outcome data as low risk because outcome data were complete.

    “Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Jones 2008, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because all relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged confounders as unclear risk because the authors stated no differences in behavioral and familial factors were observed, but did not indicate which factors these were.

    “Unclear risk Comment: authors state no differences in behavioral and familial factors were observed, but do not indicate which factors these were”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Dorgo 2009, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dorgo 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Jones 2008, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged incomplete outcome data as high risk because incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed.

    “High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged incomplete outcome data as high risk because incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed.

    “High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged random sequence generation as low risk because randomization used a random numbers table.

    “Low risk Comment: randomized using a random numbers table”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable, although methods could have been stronger for body mass index.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable although methods could have been stronger for body mass index”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Gentile 2009, the review judged blinding as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gentile 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Jones 2008, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged blinding as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Jones 2008, the review judged blinding as high risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “High risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged data collection methods as unclear risk because reliability and validity of data collection tools were not mentioned.

    “Unclear risk Comment: reliability and validity of data collection tools was not mentioned”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged blinding as high risk because only part of the researchers were blinded to group allocation due to the immense personnel used for assessments, and blinding was not fully implemented.

    “High risk Quote:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Jones 2008, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk, noting that a computer-generated random numbers table was used for the randomization process.

    “Unclear risk Comment: a computer-generated random numbers table was used for the randomization process”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Jones 2008, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jones 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Ewart 1998, the review judged selective reporting as low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported on.

    “Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ewart 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged blinding as unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged incomplete outcome data as low risk because the intention-to-treat principle was employed.

    “Low risk Comment: intention-to-treat principle employed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged random sequence generation as unclear risk because no description of the randomization process was given.

    “Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged allocation concealment as low risk because the criterion was not applicable: all participants were allocated at one point in time following recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    For Haerens 2006, the review judged incomplete outcome data as high risk because incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed.

    “High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Haerens 2009, the review judged confounders as controlled (low risk) because all relevant confounders were taken into account.

    “Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders taken into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Haerens 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Petchers 1988, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Stephens 1998, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In McManus 2008, allocation concealment was judged low risk because opaque envelopes were used to maintain allocation concealment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: opaque envelopes were utilized to maintain allocation concealment”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Stone 2003, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, blinding was judged high risk because outcomes were self-reported and it was unclear whether trained staff taking measurements were blinded to intervention allocation.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: self-reported; unclear if trained staff taking measurements were blinded to intervention allocation”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Luepker 1996, incomplete outcome data was judged low risk because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singhal 2010, selective reporting was at unclear risk of bias because it was not clear whether all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Comment: not clear if all a priori outcomes were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Simon 2004, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Li 2010, selective reporting was judged unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Comment: no Information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Peralta 2009, control of confounders was judged low risk because all relevant confounders were controlled for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stephens 1998, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Singhal 2010, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Luepker 1996, blinding was judged unclear risk because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Petchers 1988, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Li 2010, allocation concealment was judged low risk because all participants were allocated at one point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In McManus 2008, control of confounders was judged low risk because all relevant confounders were controlled for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Petchers 1988, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Li 2010, the risk of bias for random sequence generation was unclear because the randomization process was not described.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Simon 2004, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Lubans 2009, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged low risk because tools were shown to be valid and reliable for pedometers and for measuring television viewing.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: tools were shown to be valid and reliable for both pedometers and the method to measure television viewing”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singhal 2010, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because participant loss was minimal and reasons were given in Figure 1.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: participant loss minimal, reasons given in Figure 1”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Lubans 2009, incomplete outcome data was judged high risk because it was not adequately addressed.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stephens 1998, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, control of confounders was judged high risk because only baseline age, weight, and race were considered.

    “Confounders controlled?High risk Comment: only considered baseline age, weight, and race”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Robinson 1999, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Salmon 2008, data collection methods were at low risk of bias because the tools were valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection tools valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Salmon 2008, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Robinson 1999, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Simon 2004, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Robinson 1999, blinding was at low risk of bias because participants and school personnel were informed of the intervention but unaware of the primary hypothesis, and measurements were made by trained staff blinded to the experimental design.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Quote:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Robinson 1999, p1562

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Peralta 2009, random sequence generation was judged low risk because participants were randomized using a computer-based number-producing algorithm to either the intervention or active comparison group.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: participants were randomized, using a computer-based number producing algorithm, to either the intervention or active comparison group”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Luepker 1996, allocation concealment was judged low risk because all participants were allocated at one point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Peralta 2009, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged high risk because although reliability and validity were discussed for some data collection methods, not all were discussed.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?High risk Comment: although reliability and validity were discussed with some of the data collection methods, not all were discussed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In McManus 2008, blinding was judged high risk because only partial blinding was implemented.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: partial blinding was implemented only”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Peralta 2009, allocation concealment was judged low risk because all participants were allocated at one point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, selective reporting was judged unclear risk because it was not discussed in the report.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Comment: not discussed in report”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, allocation concealment was judged low risk because all participants were allocated at one point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Petchers 1988, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not described.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process was given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Salmon 2008, allocation concealment was at unclear risk of bias because it was not stated whether allocation was adequately concealed.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: it was not stated if allocation was adequately concealed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In McManus 2008, incomplete outcome data was judged high risk because it was not adequately addressed.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Lubans 2009, random sequence generation was judged unclear risk because although an envelope was used for concealment, it did not show how the randomization sequence was generated.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: although an envelope was used to attain concealment, having an envelope with the assignment does not tell us how authors generated the randomization sequence”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Stephens 1998, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Peralta 2009, selective reporting was judged low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Simon 2004, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Lubans 2009, blinding was judged low risk because blinding was implemented.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: blinding implemented”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged unclear risk because details on reliability and validity of measures were not provided.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Unclear risk Comment: did not provide details on reliability and validity of measures”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, random sequence generation was judged unclear risk because the randomization process was not described.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Lubans 2009, selective reporting was judged low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Luepker 1996, control of confounders was judged low risk because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For Kriemler 2010, the review judged data collection methods as low risk because data collection tools were reported to be valid and reliable.

    “Low risk Comment: data collection tools reported to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kriemler 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Martinez 2008, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged low risk because data collection methods were shown to be valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection methods were shown to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Peralta 2009, incomplete outcome data was judged low risk because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stone 2003, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singh 2009, data collection methods were at low risk of bias, though more detail on reliability and validity could be given.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: more detail on reliability and validity could be given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stephens 1998, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singhal 2010, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because it was not reported whether assessors were blinded.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: not reported if assessors were blinded”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Martinez 2008, random sequence generation was judged low risk because randomization used computer-generated random numbers.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: randomization took place using computer generated random numbers”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Salmon 2008, random sequence generation was at high risk of bias because participants selected a ticket from a container specifying group allocation.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) High risk Comment: participants selected a ticket from a container which specified group allocation”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stephens 1998, data collection methods were at unclear risk of bias because there was insufficient data to determine reliability and validity.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Unclear risk Comment: insufficient data to determine reliability and validity”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Martinez 2008, control of confounders was judged high risk because not all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?High risk Comment: not all relevant confounders accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Petchers 1988, data collection methods were at low risk of bias because the tools were shown to be valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection tools shown to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In McManus 2008, random sequence generation was judged low risk because although the exact sequence generation was not described, the report described how schools were selected from lists and how allocation was concealed.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: does not tell us exactly how they generated the sequence but rather how they selected schools from lists and kept allocation concealed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Simon 2004, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Luepker 1996, random sequence generation was judged unclear risk because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Simon 2004, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Salmon 2008, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Martinez 2008, selective reporting was judged low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In McManus 2008, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged low risk because data collection methods were shown to be valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection methods were shown to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singh 2009, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Lubans 2009, control of confounders was judged high risk because not all relevant confounders were controlled for.

    “Confounders controlled?High risk Comment: all relevant confounders were not controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stone 2003, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Robinson 1999, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In Stephens 1998, incomplete outcome data was at high risk of bias.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data assessment”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Li 2010, control of confounders was judged high risk because no confounders were taken into account.

    “Confounders controlled?High risk Comment: did not take any confounders into account”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In McManus 2008, selective reporting was judged high risk because data were collected on other outcomes that were not reported, such as secondary outcomes blood pressure and body mass index.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk Comment: data collected on other outcomes that were not reported (e.g.secondary outcomes blood pressure and body mass index)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Luepker 1996, selective reporting was judged low risk because all outcomes identified a priori were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Singh 2009, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Li 2010, blinding of outcome assessors was judged low risk because outcome assessors were blinded.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome assessors blinded”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singhal 2010, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because no description of the randomization process was given.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: no description of the randomization process given”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Robinson 1999, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Martinez 2008, allocation concealment was judged low risk because all participants were allocated at one point after recruitment, so allocation was not known at recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Neumark-Sztainer 2010, incomplete outcome data was judged low risk because the intervention group had less than 10% drop-out, though no details were provided on reasons for drop-outs.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: less than 10% drop-out rate in intervention group; no details provided on reasons for drop-outs”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Luepker 1996, validity and reliability of data collection methods was judged low risk because data collection tools were valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection tools were valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Singh 2009, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Singh 2009, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Li 2010, incomplete outcome data was judged low risk because about 10% of both groups did not provide follow-up data due to moving away or being absent on measurement day.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: approximately 10% of intervention and control groups did not provide follow-up data (either moved away or absent on day outcomes were measured)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Kipping 2008, attrition bias was high because, although analyses were described as intention-to-treat, only children with complete baseline and outcome data were included.

    “all analyses were undertaken using an intention to treat protocol, regardless of the number of lessons taught in intervention schools.However, we only included in the analyses those children with complete data at baseline and outcome”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kipping 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Verstraete 2006, data collection methods were at unclear risk of bias because reliability and validity were not specifically stated.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Unclear risk Comment: reliability and validity of data collection methods not specifically stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Reed 2008, the method of random sequence generation was unclear: the person who remotely randomized schools was not involved in the trial, but how randomization was performed was not described.

    “schools were then remotely randomized to either Usual Practice or Intervention by an epidemiologist not involved in the trial”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Reed 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    On 29 April 2010, the review authors decided to limit the scope to randomized controlled trials and studies with an intervention lasting at least 12 weeks.

    “On 29 April 2010, review authors decided to limit their scope by including only RCTs and studies where the intervention was implemented for a minimum of 12 weeks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Similar criteria have been adopted in recent Cochrane reviews.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Walter 1988, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Verstraete 2006, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Walter 1988, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Reed 2008, blinding was of unclear risk because no information was provided and it was likely not done.

    “no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Reed 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Walter 1988, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Walter 1988, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were controlled for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders controlled for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    In Verstraete 2006, blinding was at unclear risk of bias because no information was given and it was likely not done.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Comment: no information given, likely not done”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Verstraete 2006, random sequence generation was at unclear risk of bias because the randomization process was not reported.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: randomization process not reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Walter 1988, data collection methods were at unclear risk of bias because reliability and validity were not specifically stated.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Unclear risk Comment: reliability and validity of data collection methods not specifically stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Walter 1988, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because analyses examined whether attrition would introduce bias and average values were imputed.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: analyses were done to see if bias would be introduced due to attrition and average values of the risk values were imputed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Verstraete 2006, incomplete outcome data was at high risk of bias because it was not adequately addressed.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk Comment: incomplete outcome data was not adequately addressed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Reed 2008, selective reporting bias was low because all a priori identified outcomes were reported.

    “all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Reed 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The review has significant differences from its protocol, including the addition of risk of bias and overview of study population tables.

    “Significant differences between the protocol and review exist including the addition of risk of bias and overview of study population tables.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Trevino 2004, data collection methods were at unclear risk of bias because reliability and validity were not specifically stated.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Unclear risk Comment: reliability and validity of data collection methods not specifically stated”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Trevino 2004, blinding was at low risk of bias because school principals were asked not to inform students, parents or school staff of the intervention assignment.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Quote:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Trevino 2004, p912 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stone 2003, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In this update, all studies meeting the relevance criteria were included regardless of their level of bias.

    “In this update, all studies identified for the update meeting the relevance criteria, were included regardless of the level of bias.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The original review excluded studies of very poor methodological quality.

    “In the original review, studies of very poor methodological quality were excluded from the review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Trevino 2004, incomplete outcome data was at low risk of bias because outcome data were complete.

    “Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk Comment: outcome data complete”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Stone 2003, data collection methods were at low risk of bias because the tools were shown to be valid and reliable.

    “Data collection methods valid and reliable?Low risk Comment: data collection tools shown to be valid and reliable”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    In Kipping 2008, allocation concealment was adequate: random assignment of schools to intervention or control was concealed and performed by an author with no prior knowledge of the schools' characteristics.

    “random allocation to intervention or control school was concealed and done by one of the authors (DAL).The investigator who did the random allocation had no prior knowledge of characteristics of any of the schools”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kipping 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The inclusion criteria were changed after consultation with the Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group because many studies had been published since 2008.

    “Changes were made to the inclusion criteria a er consulting with the Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders Group because of the large number of studies published since 2008.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stone 2003, confounding was at low risk of bias because all relevant confounders were accounted for.

    “Confounders controlled?Low risk Comment: all relevant confounders were accounted for”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Verstraete 2006, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The update searches covered July 2007 to October 2011 and identified 30 new studies that were included in the updated review.

    “Searches run for update period (July 2007 -October 2011); 30 new project accounts identified and included in updated review”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Stone 2003, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Trevino 2004, random sequence generation was at low risk of bias because randomization used a random number table.

    “Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Comment: randomization took place using a random number table”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    In Walter 1988, allocation concealment was at low risk of bias because all participants were allocated at one time point after recruitment.

    “Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Comment: criterion not applicable because all participants were allocated at 1 point in time following recruitment, so at time of recruitment allocation was not known”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Three new relevance criteria were added and applied to all included studies: randomized controlled trial design, intervention duration of at least 12 weeks, and intervention aimed at the general population.

    “Three new relevance criteria added and applied to all included studies: 1) Randomized controlled trial; 2) Intervention implemented for a minimum of 12 weeks; 3) Intervention aimed at general population.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    On 11 March 2010, the review authors decided to exclude studies that did not deliver the intervention to the general population of elementary students.

    “On 11 March 2010, review authors decided to exclude studies that did not provide the intervention to the general population of elementary students.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: In several developed countries, more than half of school-attending children are overweight.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In Trevino 2004, selective reporting was at low risk of bias because all a priori outcomes were reported.

    “Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: all outcomes identified a priori were reported on”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
392 of 392
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    It is uncertain which strategies best promote lifelong healthy behavior.

    “However, it is not clear what the most effective strategies are to promote life-long healthy behaviors.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Similar criteria have been adopted in recent Cochrane reviews.

    “Similar criteria have been implemented in recent Cochrane reviews.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In several developed countries, more than half of school-attending children are overweight.

    “This decision was made because in a number of developed countries more than half of school attending children are overweight.”
3 of 3

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Television-viewing effect count changes from seven to six

    Minor

    The same discussion first identifies seven studies with statistically significant positive effects, then refers to six such studies.

  • VO2-max measurement methods are counted differently

    Minor

    One passage divides the six studies equally between blood-gas measurement and pulse-rate proxies; the later breakdown names two blood-gas studies and four proxy studies.

  • Television-viewing measurement is described as both entirely and not entirely self-reported

    Minor

    The results section says all studies measured television viewing by self-report, but the quality discussion says one study did not rely on self-report.

  • Luepker pulse-rate effect is placed at conflicting follow-up times

    Minor

    The narrative says the significant effect appeared three years after the intervention, whereas Appendix 13 reports P = 0.03 at the end of the three-year intervention.

  • Li 2010 total does not match group counts

    Minor

    The reported intervention and control counts sum to 4,120, not the stated total of 4,210.

    Reported 4210 · recomputed 4120

5 of 5

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

74 of the 1138 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. Caballero, 2001, The Pathways obesity prevention study: overview of design and measurements, FASEB Journal, 15, A1091
  2. Webber, 2007, Outcomes of a randomized controlled field trial to promote physical activity in middle-school girls: Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls, Circulation, 115, e221
  3. Aganovic, 2002, The effect of weight loss on cardiovascular risk factors: "Healthy Weight Loss School", International Journal of Obesity, 26, S200
  4. Bindler, 2000, Interventions to decrease cardiovascular risk factors in children: the Northwest Pediatric Heart project, National Academies of Practice Forum: Issues in Interdisciplinary Care, 2, 43
  5. Chow, 2001, Testing Ajzen's theory of planned behavior on the physical activity participatory behavior of Hong Kong children and youth: a pilot study, 373
  6. Crawford, 1997, An approach to providing dietary and physical-activity dairy instruction to adolescent girls enrolled in a longitudinal study: the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Growth and Health Study, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 65, S1297
  7. Eisenmann, 2007, Fatness, fitness, and insulin sensitivity among 7- to 9-year-old children, Obesity, 15, 2135, 10.1038/oby.2007.254 · DOI
  8. Ernst, 2003, Examination of physical activity during a physical activity intervention and recess, Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 74, A43
  9. Ewart, 1998, Effects of school-based aerobic exercise on blood pressure in adolescent girls at risk for hypertension, American Journal of Public Health, 88, 949, 10.2105/ajph.88.6.949 · DOI
  10. Faigenbaum, 2001, Plyometric training for children and adolescents, American College of Sports Medicine, December, 1
  11. Fairclough, 2002, Promoting lifetime physical activity through physical education. Are we providing the right opportunities?, British Journal of Teaching Physical Education, 32, 38
  12. Hastie, 2007, Impact of a sport education "obstacle course" season on students' cardiovascular fitness, Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 78
  13. Jackson, 2001, Effects of a physical activity programme on activity and motor skills in young children: a controlled trial, FASEB Journal, 15, A951
  14. Fullerton, 2007, Quality of life in Mexican-American children following a weight management program, Obesity, 15, 2553, 10.1038/oby.2007.306 · DOI
  15. Jones, 1988, Regular aerobic exercise and blood pressure in children. An efficacy school-based randomized clinical trial, American Journal of Epidemiology, 128, 898
  16. Jones, 2007, The effect of a 16-week implementation of intervention strategies into after-school activity lesson plans on the aerobic fitness and percentage body fat of children aged 8-14 years old, British Journal of Sports Medicine, 41, 119
  17. Kaplan, 1996, Effects of a 3-month exercise and nutrition program for childhood obesity on anthropometrics, physical fitness, and serum lipids, International Pediatrics, 11, 31
  18. Kimm, 1997, Longitudinal assessment of physical activity (PA) in young girls, American Journal of Epidemiology, 145, S25
  19. Liskova, 2002, Long-term effectiveness of obesity intervention program in children, International Journal of Obesity, 26, S10
  20. Ludwig, 2004, Assessment of Calgary elementary physical education programs, Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology, 29 Suppl, S63
  21. MacConnie, 1991, The effect of parental inclusion in an exercise and nutrition intervention program, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 23, S30
  22. Mahon, 1993, The effects of daily physical education on health related physical fitness in first-grade children, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, March Suppl, A
  23. Mandigo, 2003, Physical activities available at Alberta schools
  24. McManus, 2008, Using heart-rate feedback to increase physical activity in children, Preventive Medicine, 47, 402, 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.06.001 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Drews, 2009, Recruitment and retention strategies and methods in the HEALTHY study, International Journal of Obesity, 33, S21, 10.1038/ijo.2009.113 · DOI
  26. Mecredy, 1993, Efficacy and community development: heart health interventions and adolescents, Public Health and Epidemiology Report Ontario, 4, 16
  27. Metzker, 2000, The effects of a transtheoretical model physical activity intervention program on the physical activity behavior of female adolescents, Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 71, A
  28. Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services BoCDPCHP, 2003, Home to School: using handheld palm computers to gather information on environmental factors affecting walking to school among elementary school children, Health Education and Behavior, 4, 405
  29. Moya, 2011, Cost-effectiveness of an intervention to reduce overweight and obesity in 9-10-year-olds. The Cuenca study, Gaceta Sanitaria, 25, 198
  30. Nelson, 2011, Impact of dancing classrooms on elementary physical education: a school climate study of personal and social development, TAHPERD Journal, 79, 12
  31. Oxizoglou, 2005, A comparative study of a handball program and a physical education curriculum and their influence on the anthropometric characteristics formation of pupils aged 12-14, Inquiries in Sport & Physical Education, 3, 123
  32. Parlee-Hirth, 2002, California children's 5 a day - power play! campaign, American Journal of Health Promotion, 16, 371
  33. Peralta, 2009, Promoting healthy lifestyles among adolescent boys: the Fitness Improvement and Lifestyle Awareness Program RCT, Preventive Medicine, 48, 537, 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.04.007 · DOI
  34. Ransdell, 2003, Increasing physical activity in girls and women, JOPERD, 74, 37
  35. Robinson, 2007, Stanford GEMS (Girls health Enrichment Multisite Studies): long-term efficacy of after-school dance and screen time reduction in low-income African-American girls, Circulation, 116, 56
  36. Rodgers, 2001, The Evaluation of a school-based obesity prevention program among fourth grade students
  37. Sabet-Sarvestani, 2008, The effect of dietary behavior modification on anthropometric indices in obese adolescent female students, Iranian Journal of Pediatrics, 18, 71
  38. Sacher, 2003, An integrated programme of nutrition, exercise and behavioural modification in a small group of obese 7-11-year-old children, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 62, 3A
  39. Saksvig, 2003, A successful school-based diabetes prevention intervention for native Canadian children, Diabetes, 52, A209
  40. McKenzie, 1993, Effects of a curriculum and inservice program on the quantity and quality of elementary physical education classes, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 64, 178, 10.1080/02701367.1993.10608795 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Salmon, 2005, Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity among 10-year-old children: overview and process evaluation of the 'Switch Play' intervention, Health Promotion International, 20, 7, 10.1093/heapro/dah502 · DOI
  42. Santiago, 2007, Health-related fitness changes in Hispanic elementary schoolchildren after 1 year of regular physical education, Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport, 78, A
  43. Schneider, 2009, Rationale, design and methods for process evaluation in the HEALTHY study, International Journal of Obesity, 33, S60, 10.1038/ijo.2009.118 · DOI
  44. Shephard, 1985, Long-term studies of physical activity in children: The Trois-Rivieres experience, 252
  45. Telforda, 2009, The Lifestyle Of Our Kids (LOOK) project: outline of methods, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 12, 156, 10.1016/j.jsams.2007.03.009 · DOI
  46. Theodorakis, 2008, Review of the applications of a health education program "I Do not Smoke I Exercise" to elementary, junior high school and high school students, Inquiries in Sport & Physical Education, 6, 181
  47. Trudeau, 1999, Daily primary school physical education: effects on physical activity during adult life, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31, 111, 10.1097/00005768-199901000-00018 · DOI
  48. Venditti, 2009, Rationale, design and methods of the HEALTHY study behavior intervention component, International Journal of Obesity, 33, S44, 10.1038/ijo.2009.116 · DOI
  49. Wang, 2006, Obesity prevention in low socioeconomic status urban African-American adolescents: study design and preliminary findings of the HEALTH-KIDS Study, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 60, 92, 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602272 · DOI
  50. Westcott, 1995, School-based conditioning programs for physically unfit children, Strength and Conditioning, 46, 345
  51. Gutin, 2008, Preliminary findings of the effect of a 3-year after-school physical activity intervention on fitness and body fat: the Medical College of Georgia Fitkid Project, International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, 3, Suppl 9, 10.1080/17477160801896457 · DOI
  52. Wang, 2008, Cost-effectiveness of a school-based obesity prevention program, Journal of School Health, 78, 619, 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2008.00357.x · DOI
  53. Yin, 2005, An environmental approach to obesity prevention in children: Medical College of Georgia FitKid Project year 1 results, Obesity Research, 13, 2153, 10.1038/oby.2005.267 · DOI
  54. Young, 2006, Effects of a life skills intervention for increasing physical activity in adolescent girls, Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 160, 1255, 10.1001/archpedi.160.12.1255 · DOI
  55. Young, 2007, Policies and opportunities for physical activity in middle school environments, Journal of School Health, 77, 41, 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2007.00161.x · DOI
  56. Arbeit, 1992, The Heart Smart cardiovascular school health promotion: behavior correlates of risk factor change, Preventive Medicine, 21, 18, 10.1016/0091-7435(92)90003-z · DOI
  57. Centers for Disease Control, 1997, Promote lifelong physical activity among young people, risk behavior surveillance - United States, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 46, 1
  58. Centers for Disease Control Chapter 6: understanding and promoting physical activity Surgeon General's Report on Physical Activity & Health 1999 210 59
  59. Dobbins M Tirilis D A synthesis of review evidence: an overview of systematic review evidence on the effectiveness of community-based interventions to promote healthy diet and nutrition, built environment, and social determinants of health Report commissioned by the Population Health Improvement Research Network (PHIRN) December 2011
  60. Gutin, 1997, Effects of physical training on cardiovascular health in obese children, 382
  61. Kannas, 1992, Leisure-time physical activity and related behavior in four European countries. Cuneo, Italy. In Cale L, Almond L: Physical activity levels of secondary-aged children: a review, Health Education Journal, 51, 192, 10.1177/001789699205100410 · DOI
  62. Klepp, 1993, The Oslo Youth Study: a 12 year follow-up study of a school-based health education program, 94
  63. Luszczynska, 2005, Social cognitive theory, 127
  64. Marella, 1992, Evaluation de l'aptitude physique: eurofit, batterie experientagle. Rome: Scuola Dello Slopoer. In Cale & Almond. Physical activity levels of secondary-aged children: a review, Health Education Journal, 51, 192
  65. McKenzie, 1996, School physical education: effect of the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health, Preventive Medicine, 25, 423, 10.1006/pmed.1996.0074 · DOI
  66. Sallis, 1993, Project SPARK: effects of physical education on adiposity in children, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 699, 127, 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb18844.x · DOI
  67. Stone, 1998, Effects of physical activity interventions in youth: review and synthesis, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 15, 298, 10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00082-8 · DOI
  68. Thomas H Siracusa L Ross G Beath L Hanna L Michaud M Effectiveness of school-based interventions in reducing adolescent risk behaviors: a systematic review of reviews Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) 1999
  69. Thomas, 2004, A process for systematically reviewing the literature: Providing the research evidence for public health nursing interventions, Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 1, 176, 10.1111/j.1524-475x.2004.04006.x · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dobbins, M., Husson, H., DeCorby, K., & LaRocca, R. L.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-02-28
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
CD007651-CD007651
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W2135517195
Cited by
1,358
References
1,138
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 86 · 2022: 110 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 93 · 2019: 87 · 2018: 97 · 2017: 87 · 2016: 105 · 2015: 116 · 2014: 87 · 2013: 64 · 2012: 54
FWCI
13.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
Keywords
school-based physical activity intervention, children and adolescents, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, physical fitness, body composition, body mass index, sedentary time, health-related quality of life, intervention effectiveness, cardiometabolic health, adiposity, intervention components, physical activity guidelines, adverse events, school health promotion, physical education, recess, recess games
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Health Promotion, Humans, Motor Activity, Physical Fitness, Schools, Program Evaluation, Exercise, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review