Cited by 117Physical Activity and HealthChild Development and Digital TechnologyObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Family-based interventions for reducing sedentary time in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Open access
Marsh, S., Foley, L. S., Wilks, D. C., Maddison, R.·2014·Obesity Reviews

Abstract

Family involvement in interventions to reduce sedentary time may help foster appropriate long-term screen-based habits in children. This review systematically synthesized evidence from randomized controlled trials of interventions with a family component that targeted reduction of sedentary time, including TV viewing, video games and computer use, in children. MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Embase were searched from inception through March 2012. Seventeen articles were considered eligible and included in the review. Studies were judged to be at low-to-moderate risk of bias. Despite inconsistent study results, level of parental involvement, rather than the setting itself, appeared an important determinant of intervention success. Studies including a parental component of medium-to-high intensity were consistently associated with statistically significant changes in sedentary behaviours. Participant age was also identified as a determinant of intervention outcomes; all three studies conducted in pre-school children demonstrated significant decreases in sedentary time. Finally, TV exposure appeared to be related to changes in energy intake rather than physical activity. Future studies should assess the effects of greater parental involvement and child age on success of sedentary behaviour interventions. More research is required to better understand the relationship between screen time and health behaviours, particularly energy intake.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/obr.12105

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Marsh, S., Foley, L. S., Wilks, D. C., & Maddison, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • University of Passau (DE)
Corresponding author
Marsh, S.
Venue
Obesity Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-09-16
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
117-133
ISSN
  • 1467-7881 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-789X
OpenAlex
W1604448167
Cited by
117
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7
FWCI
0.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obesity Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023187/1, MC_UU_12015/6)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007462/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
sedentary behavior, family intervention, children, parental involvement, screen time, television viewing, video games, computer use, energy intake, physical activity, preschool children, childhood obesity prevention
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Energy Intake, Child, Child, Preschool, Computers, Energy Metabolism, Family Health, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Leisure Activities, Male, Obesity, Parents, Television, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Risk Reduction Behavior, Sedentary Behavior

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