Search

Background: School-based interventions are a key opportunity to improve children’s physical activity (PA); however, there is lack of evidence about how pedagogical approaches to motor learning in physical education (PE) might affect PA in children. Therefore, this study aimed to assess how different pedagogical approaches in PE might affect children’s PA. Methods: Participants (n = 360, 5–6 years) from 12 primary schools within the SAMPLE-PE randomized controlled trial were randomly allocated to either Linear Pedagogy (LP: n = 3) or Nonlinear Pedagogy (NP: n = 3) interventions, where schools received a 15-week PE intervention delivered by trained coaches, or to a control group (n = 6), where schools followed usual practice. ActiGraph GT9X accelerometers were used to assess PA metrics (moderate-to-vigorous PA, mean raw acceleration and lowest acceleration over the most active hour and half hour) over whole and segmented weeks at baseline, immediately post-intervention and 6 months follow-up. Intention to treat analysis employing multilevel modelling was used to assess intervention effects. Results: LP and NP interventions did not significantly affect children’s PA levels compared to the control group. Conclusion: PE interventions based on LP and NP alone might not be effective in improving habitual PA in children.

This study aimed to: (1) compare acceleration output between ActiGraph (AG) hip and wrist monitors and GENEActiv (GA) wrist monitors; (2) identify raw acceleration sedentary and stationary thresholds for the two brands and placements; and (3) validate the thresholds during a free-living period. Twenty-seven from 9- to 10-year-old children wore AG accelerometers on the right hip, dominant- and non-dominant wrists, GA accelerometers on both wrists, and an activPAL on the thigh, while completing seven sedentary and light-intensity physical activities, followed by 10 minutes of school recess. In a subsequent study, 21 children wore AG and GA wrist monitors and activPAL for two days of free-living. The main effects of activity and brand and a significant activity × brand × placement interaction were observed (all p < 0.0001). Output from the AG hip was lower than the AG wrist monitors (both p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves established AG sedentary thresholds of 32.6 mg for the hip, 55.6 mg and 48.1 mg for dominant and non-dominant wrists respectively. GA wrist thresholds were 56.5 mg (dominant) and 51.6 mg (non-dominant). Similar thresholds were observed for stationary behaviours. The AG non-dominant threshold came closest to achieving equivalency with activPAL during free-living.

Understanding family physical activity (PA) behaviour is essential for designing effective family-based PA interventions. However, effective approaches to capture the perceptions and “lived experiences” of families are not yet well established. The aims of the study were to: (1) demonstrate how a “write, draw, show and tell” (WDST) methodological approach can be appropriate to family-based PA research, and (2) present two distinct family case studies to provide insights into the habitual PA behaviour and experiences of a nuclear and single-parent family. Six participants (including two “target” children aged 9–11 years, two mothers and two siblings aged 6–8 years) from two families were purposefully selected to take part in the study, based on their family structure. Participants completed a paper-based PA diary and wore an ActiGraph GT9X accelerometer on their left wrist for up to 10 weekdays and 16 weekend days. A range of WDST tasks were then undertaken by each family to offer contextual insight into their family-based PA. The selected families participated in different levels and modes of PA, and reported contrasting leisure opportunities and experiences. These novel findings encourage researchers to tailor family-based PA intervention programmes to the characteristics of the family.