Search

Abstract Background Mutual learning and shared decision-making are key elements of Participatory Action Research (PAR), highlighting the important role of the facilitator to support this. This study aims to illustrate how a facilitator can contribute to successful PAR sessions based on the reflection of three PAR projects. Methods Participatory sessions took place with adolescents for 3–4 school years. After each session (n = 252 sessions across three projects), facilitators filled in a reflection form that assessed the group process and their facilitating role. Facilitators independently coded a selection of 135 reflection forms partly deductive and partly inductive based on core PAR principles derived from a pragmatic literature search. Results A well-prepared session – for example, including active and creative participatory methods and a clearly stated goal – contributed to efficiency and the necessary flexibility. Making agreements, making sure everyone is heard and taking 'fun-time' appeared important for creating and maintaining a safe, functional and positive atmosphere. Finally, facilitators needed to encourage co-researchers to take the lead and adapt to the group dynamics, to ensure ownership and shared decision-making. Conclusion In-depth qualitative analyses of a standardized reflection form used in three different PAR projects resulted in various lessons to support facilitators in collaborating with co-researchers in PAR projects.

Abstract System dynamics approaches are increasingly addressing the complexity of public health problems such as childhood overweight and obesity. These approaches often use system mapping methods, such as the construction of causal loop diagrams, to gain an understanding of the system of interest. However, there is limited practical guidance on how such a system understanding can inform the development of an action programme that can facilitate systems changes. The Lifestyle Innovations Based on Youth Knowledge and Experience (LIKE) programme combines system dynamics and participatory action research to improve obesity-related behaviours, including diet, physical activity, sleep and sedentary behaviour, in 10–14-year-old adolescents in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. This paper illustrates how we used a previously obtained understanding of the system of obesity-related behaviours in adolescents to develop an action programme to facilitate systems changes. A team of evaluation researchers guided interdisciplinary action-groups throughout the process of identifying mechanisms, applying the Intervention Level Framework to identify leverage points and arriving at action ideas with aligning theories of change. The LIKE action programme consisted of 8 mechanisms, 9 leverage points and 14 action ideas which targeted the system’s structure and function within multiple subsystems. This illustrates the feasibility of developing actions targeting higher system levels within the confines of a research project timeframe when sufficient and dedicated effort in this process is invested. Furthermore, the system dynamics action programme presented in this study contributes towards the development and implementation of public health programmes that aim to facilitate systems changes in practice.

PurposeChildhood overweight is considered a complex problem influenced by a range of factors, including energy balance-related behaviours (EBRBs) and interacting drivers of these behaviours. There is growing support that applying a systems approach is required to tackle complex problems resulting in actions that attempt to change the system’s dynamics. Additionally, a participatory approach is advocated to include the lived experience of the population of interest both in the understanding of the system as well as the development, implementation and evaluation of relevant actions. We therefore combined Intervention Mapping, Participatory Action Research (PAR) and system dynamics in the development, implementation and evaluation of actions contributing to healthy EBRBs together with adolescents.MethodsFour PAR groups comprising of 6–8 adolescent co-researchers (10–14 years) and 1–2 adult facilitators met weekly during 3–4 years. The structured Intervention Mapping protocol guided the process of the systematic development, implementation and evaluation of actions. System dynamics tools were included for the creation of Causal Loop Diagrams and development of systemic actions.ResultsOur approach comprised six steps that were executed by the PAR groups: (1) build Causal Loop Diagrams for each EBRB through peer research and identify overarching mechanisms, (2) determine leverage points using the Intervention Level Framework, (3) develop action ideas, (4) develop detailed actions including an implementation plan, (5) implement and, (6) evaluate the actions. PAR ensured that the actions fitted the lived experience of the adolescents, whilst system dynamics promoted actions at different levels of the system. The Intervention Mapping protocol ensured that the actions were theory-based. The main challenge involved integrating system dynamics within our practise in cooperation with adolescent co-researchers.ConclusionWe experienced that combining Intervention Mapping, PAR and system dynamics worked well in developing, implementing and evaluating actions that target different levels of the system that drive adolescents’ EBRBs. This study serves as an example to other studies aimed at developing, implementing and evaluating actions using a participatory and systems approach.

Abstract Objective: The substantial changes in the physical and social environment during the transition from primary to secondary school may significantly impact adolescents’ energy balance-related behaviours (i.e. dietary behaviour, sedentary behaviour, sleep behaviour and physical activity (PA)). This is the first review systematically summarising evidence on changes in four energy balance-related behaviours of adolescents across the school transition from primary to secondary school. Design: For this systematic review, the electronic databases Embase, PsycINFO and SPORTDiscus were searched for relevant studies from inception to August 2021. PubMed was searched for relevant studies from inception to September 2022. Inclusion criteria were: (i) longitudinal studies reporting; (ii) one or more energy balance-related behaviours; and (iii) across the school transition, that is, with measurement(s) during both primary and secondary school. Setting: Transition from primary to secondary school Participants: Adolescents across the transition from primary to secondary school. Results: Thirty-four studies were eligible. We found strong evidence for an increase in sedentary time, moderate evidence for a decrease in fruit and vegetable consumption, and inconclusive evidence for a change in total, light, and moderate-to-vigorous PA, active transport, screen time, unhealthy snack consumption, and sugar-sweetened beverages consumption among adolescents across the school transition. Conclusions: During the transition from primary to secondary school, sedentary time and fruit and vegetable consumption tend to change unfavourably. More high-quality, longitudinal research is needed specifically on changes in energy balance-related behaviour across the school transition, especially regarding sleep behaviour. (Prospero registration: CRD42018084799)

Introduction and MethodsTo develop an understanding of the dynamics driving obesity-related behaviours in adolescents, we conducted systems-based analysis on a causal loop diagram (CLD) created from a multi-actor perspective, including academic researchers, adolescents and local stakeholders.ResultsThe CLD contained 121 factors and 31 feedback loops. We identified six subsystems with their goals: (1) interaction between adolescents and the food environment, with profit maximisation as goal, (2) interaction between adolescents and the physical activity environment, with utility maximisation of outdoor spaces as goal, (3) interaction between adolescents and the online environment, with profit maximisation from technology use as goal, (4) interaction between adolescents, parenting and the wider socioeconomic environment, with a goal focused on individual parental responsibility, (5) interaction between healthcare professionals and families, with the goal resulting in treating obesity as an isolated problem, and (6) transition from childhood to adolescence, with the goal centring around adolescents’ susceptibility to an environment that stimulates obesity-related behaviours.DiscussionAnalysis showed that inclusion of the researchers’ and stakeholders’ perspectives contributed to an understanding of how the system structure of an environment works. Integration of the adolescents’ perspective enriched insights on how adolescents interact with that environment. The analysis further showed that the dynamics driving obesity-related behaviours are geared towards further reinforcing such behaviours.

Abstract Background Youth-led Participatory Action Research (YPAR) involves children throughout the process of developing and implementing interventions. Combining YPAR with a structural approach for designing and planning interventions, such as Intervention Mapping (IM), may further improve implementation and effectiveness of interventions. This paper describes how YPAR and IM were combined in the Kids in Action study. Methods The Kids in Action study aims to improve health behaviors of 9–12-year old children living in a low socioeconomic neighborhood in Amsterdam, by co-designing interventions with these children. At each of four schools 6–8 children (N = 18–24 total per year) and two academic researchers formed participatory groups that met weekly or every fortnight during two school years. An IM expert panel advised the participatory groups on the application of IM. Results Following the IM protocol, we conducted a participatory needs assessment with children, parents and professionals, in IM-step 1. In IM-step 2, the IM expert panel constructed matrices of program objectives, and the children provided feedback. In collaboration with children programs were designed and produced using an iterative process during IM-steps 3–4. In IM-step 5, the participatory groups and professional community partners designed the implementation plan. Finally, in IM-step 6, the protocol of the process and effect evaluation – executed by academic researchers with input from children – was developed. Conclusions By combining YPAR and IM, several interventions have been developed and implemented, varying from a school water policy to extracurricular sports activities. Sharing responsibility with children was challenging when combining IM with YPAR. In YPAR children are given as much autonomy as possible, while traditional IM development work is primarily done by academic researchers. Strengths in combining IM and YPAR include the involvement of the end-users - children - throughout the process while at the same time developing interventions based on existing evidence. Time-management, a multidisciplinary team, and flexibility are important conditions when combining IM with YPAR. A strong community project group, with professionals who were willing to help children develop and execute their ideas, was an important success factor. This study can serve as an example to other YPAR studies developing interventions using the IM protocol.