Cited by 112Health Policy Implementation ScienceSchool Health and Nursing EducationPhysical Activity and Health

Examining the link between program implementation and behavior outcomes in the lifestyle education for activity program (LEAP)

Saunders, Ruth P., Ward, Dianne, Felton, Gwen M., Dowda, Marsha, Pate, Russell R.·2006·Evaluation and Program Planning

Abstract

Lifestyle Education for Activity Program (LEAP) was a comprehensive, school-based intervention designed to promote physical activity in high school girls. The intervention focused on changes in instructional practices and the school environment to affect personal, social, and environmental factors related to physical activity. Multiple process evaluation tools and an organizational assessment tool were developed to monitor program implementation from a framework called the LEAP essential elements, which characterized complete and acceptable intervention delivery; secular trends were also monitored. Using process data, LEAP intervention schools were categorized into low- and high-implementing groups and compared with control schools on nine essential elements assessed at the organizational level. The Wilcoxon scores test revealed that low- and high-implementing intervention, and control schools differed significantly on two of nine administrator-reported organizational-level components: having a physical activity team and having a faculty-staff health promotion program. A mixed-model analysis of covariance indicated that, compared to control schools, a greater percentage of girls in high-implementing schools reported engaging in vigorous physical activity. Process evaluation can be used to understand the relationship between level of implementation and successful program outcome.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.08.006

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saunders, R. P., Ward, D., Felton, G. M., Dowda, M., & Pate, R. R.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Saunders, Ruth P.
Venue
Evaluation and Program Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-11
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
352-364
ISSN
0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2026231518
Cited by
112
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scholar Commons (University of South Carolina) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
Keywords
school-based physical activity intervention, high school girls, program implementation, process evaluation, implementation fidelity, organizational factors, high-intensity exercise, secular trends, intervention delivery

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.

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