Cited by 61Physical Activity and HealthHealth Policy Implementation ScienceSchool Health and Nursing Education

Evaluation of physical activity interventions in youth via the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework: A systematic review of randomised and non-randomised trials

McGoey, Tara, Root, Zach, Bruner, Mark W., Law, Barbi·2015·Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Context An identified limitation of existing reviews of physical activity interventions in school-aged youth is the lack of reporting on issues related to the translatability of the research into health promotion practice.Objective This review used the Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework to determine the extent to which intervention studies promoting physical activity in youth report on factors that inform generalizability across settings and populations.Methods and results A systematic search for controlled interventions conducted within the last ten years identified 50 studies that met the selection criteria. Based on Reach, Efficacy/Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance criteria, most of these studies focused on statistically significant findings and internal validity rather than on issues of external validity. Due to this lack of information, it is difficult to determine whether or not reportedly successful interventions are feasible and sustainable in an uncontrolled, real-world setting.Conclusions Areas requiring further research include costs associated with recruitment and implementation, adoption rate, and representativeness of participants and settings. This review adds data to support recommendations that interventions promoting physical activity in youth should include assessment of adoption and implementation issues.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.04.006

Cites

106 of 106 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGoey, T., Root, Z., Bruner, M. W., & Law, B.
Affiliations
Nipissing University (CA)
Corresponding author
McGoey, Tara
Venue
Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-07
Volume
76
Pages
58-67
ISSN
0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4210984859
Cited by
61
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › School Health and Nursing Education
Keywords
physical activity interventions, youth, school-aged children, RE-AIM framework, generalizability, intervention adoption, intervention implementation, intervention maintenance, health promotion
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Health Promotion, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, 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.

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