Interventions to promote physical activity among young and adolescent girls: a systematic review
Abstract
A narrative systematic review was conducted to describe the available evidence from physical activity (PA) interventions that targeted girls aged 5-18 years and to determine their effectiveness and key characteristics of success. Systematic literature searches were conducted using four databases: PubMed, Web of Science, PsychInfo and SPORTDiscus and by examining the reference lists of included articles and published relevant reviews, to identify studies published in English from 2000 to July 2010. Randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs with pre-test and post-test behavioral outcome data (objective or self-report measure) were included. Methodological quality was assessed using a checklist and conclusions were made concerning effectiveness. A total of 29 articles were reviewed, describing the evaluation of 21 interventions. Ten studies reported a favorable intervention effect upon PA outcomes, seven of which were rated as having a high methodological quality. Multi-component school-based interventions that also offer a physical education that address the unique needs of girls seemed to be the most effective. Although family support is revealed as ineffective, peer strategies showed promising evidence. The review finishes highlighting possible intervention strategies and reporting areas where further investigation is required.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
School-based programs are regarded as the most promising setting for improving adolescent girls' PA.
“Camacho-Minano et al. (2011) and Pearson et al. (2015) suggested that school-based PA interventions are the most promising setting to impact adolescent girls' PA levels.”
From The effectiveness of school-based physical activity interventions for adolescent girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Camacho-Minano et al., 2011
Allocation concealment and blinding were usually absent in the included studies, and this negatively affected the risk of bias scores for the majority of included studies.
“As found in previous reviews, both for PA interventions for adolescents (Camacho-Minano et al., 2011) and schoolbased behavioural interventions (Khambalia, Dickinson, Hardy, Gill, & Baur, 2012), allocation concealment and blinding were usually absent, and this negatively affected the risk of bias scores for the majority of included studies.”
From The effectiveness of school-based physical activity interventions for adolescent girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Camacho-Minano et al., 2011
School-based interventions are more effective when enjoyment of physical education is prioritised and girls are given freedom of choice of activities.
“Similarly, Camacho-Minano et al. (2011) suggested that school-based interventions are more effective when enjoyment of PE is prioritised and girls are given freedom of choice of activities.”
From The effectiveness of school-based physical activity interventions for adolescent girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Camacho-Minano et al., 2011
Risk of bias scores were low across the included interventions mainly due to the need for a greater explanation of the randomisation process.
“Risk of bias scores were low across the included interventions mainly due to the need for a greater explanation of the randomisation process which is consistent with a previous systematic review of adolescent girls (Camacho-Minano et al., 2011).”
From The effectiveness of school-based physical activity interventions for adolescent girls: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Camacho-Minano et al., 2011
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 84 · Cited by 201
- Authors
- Camacho-Minano, M. J., LaVoi, N. M., & Barr-Anderson, D. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- ORCID
- LaVoi, N. M.
- Venue
- Health Education Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-06-16
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1025-1049
- ISSN
- 0268-1153 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-3648
- OpenAlex
- W2148650636
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 84
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 1.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Health Education Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Scholar Commons (University of South Carolina) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Minnesota
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Sports and Physical Education Studies
- Keywords
- physical activity interventions, adolescent girls, young girls, school-based intervention, physical education, family support, peer influence, intervention effectiveness, methodological quality
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Exercise
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
