Dataset Information

'Measuring' Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The concept of physical literacy has received increased research and international attention recently. Where intervention programs and empirical research are gaining momentum, their operationalizations differ significantly. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to inform practice in the measure/assessment of physical literacy via a systematic review of research that has assessed physical literacy (up to 14 June, 2017). METHODS:Five databases were searched using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols guidelines, with 32 published articles meeting the inclusion criteria. English-language, peer-reviewed published papers containing empirical studies of physical literacy were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS:Qualitative methods included: (1) interviews; (2) open-ended questionnaires; (3) reflective diaries; (4) focus groups; (5) participant observations; and (6) visual methods. Quantitative methods included: (1) monitoring devices (e.g., accelerometers); (2) observations (e.g., of physical activity or motor proficiency); (3) psychometrics (e.g., enjoyment, self-perceptions); (4) performance measures (e.g., exergaming, objective times/distances); (5) anthropometric measurements; and (6) one compound measure. Of the measures that made an explicit distinction: 22 (61%) examined the physical domain, eight (22%) the affective domain; five (14%) the cognitive domain; and one (3%) combined three domains (physical, affective, and cognitive) of physical literacy. Researchers tended to declare their philosophical standpoint significantly more in qualitative research compared with quantitative research. CONCLUSIONS:Current research adopts diverse often incompatible methodologies in measuring/assessing physical literacy. Our analysis revealed that by adopting simplistic and linear methods, physical literacy cannot be measured/assessed in a traditional/conventional sense. Therefore, we recommend that researchers are more creative in developing integrated philosophically aligned approaches to measuring/assessing physical literacy. Future research should consider the most recent developments in the field of physical literacy for policy formation.

SUBMITTER: Edwards LC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5808047 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

'Measuring' Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings.

Edwards Lowri C LC Bryant Anna S AS Keegan Richard J RJ Morgan Kevin K Cooper Stephen-Mark SM Jones Anwen M AM

Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) 20180301 3

<h4>Background</h4>The concept of physical literacy has received increased research and international attention recently. Where intervention programs and empirical research are gaining momentum, their operationalizations differ significantly.<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of this study was to inform practice in the measure/assessment of physical literacy via a systematic review of research that has assessed physical literacy (up to 14 June, 2017).<h4>Methods</h4>Five databases were searched usi ...[more]

PMID: 29143266

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOver the past decade, there has been increased interest amongst researchers, practitioners and policymakers in physical literacy for children and young people and the assessment of the concept within physical education (PE). This systematic review aimed to identify tools to assess physical literacy and its physical, cognitive and affective domains within children aged 7-11.9 years, and to examine the measurement properties, feasibility and elements of physical literacy assessed within each tool.MethodsSix databases (EBSCO host platform, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Education Research Complete, SPORTDiscus) were searched up to 10th September 2020. Studies were included if they sampled children aged between 7 and 11.9 years, employed field-based assessments of physical literacy and/or related affective, physical or cognitive domains, reported measurement properties (quantitative) or theoretical development (qualitative), and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. The methodological quality and measurement properties of studies and assessment tools were appraised using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments risk of bias checklist. The feasibility of each assessment was considered using a utility matrix and elements of physical literacy element were recorded using a descriptive checklist.ResultsThe search strategy resulted in a total of 11467 initial results. After full text screening, 11 studies (3 assessments) related to explicit physical literacy assessments. Forty-four studies (32 assessments) were relevant to the affective domain, 31 studies (15 assessments) were relevant to the physical domain and 2 studies (2 assessments) were included within the cognitive domain. Methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties within the included studies were mixed. The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy-2 and the Passport For Life had evidence of acceptable measurement properties from studies of very good methodological quality and assessed a wide range of physical literacy elements. Feasibility results indicated that many tools would be suitable for a primary PE setting, though some require a level of expertise to administer and score that would require training.ConclusionsThis review has identified a number of existing assessments that could be useful in a physical literacy assessment approach within PE and provides further information to empower researchers and practitioners to make informed decisions when selecting the most appropriate assessment for their needs, purpose and context. The review indicates that researchers and tool developers should aim to improve the methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties of assessments to better inform the field.Trial registrationPROSPERO: CRD42017062217.

Project description:BackgroundCompassion in healthcare provides measurable benefits to patients, physicians, and healthcare systems. However, data regarding the factors that predict care (and a lack of care) are scattered. This study systematically reviews biomedical literature within the Transactional Model of Physician Compassion and synthesizes evidence regarding the predictors of physician empathy, compassion, and related constructs (ECRC).MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, OvidJournals, ProQuest, Web of Science, and Scopus using search terms relating to ECRC and its predictors. Eligible studies included physicians as participants. Methodological quality was assessed based on the Cochrane Handbook, using ROBINS-I risk of bias tool for quantitative and CASP for qualitative studies. Confidence in findings was evaluated according to GRADE-CERQual approach.ResultsOne hundred fifty-two included studies (74,866 physicians) highlighted the diversity of influences on compassion in healthcare (54 unique predictors). Physician-related predictors (88%) were gender, experience, values, emotions and coping strategies, quality of life, and burnout. Environmental predictors (38%) were organizational structure, resources, culture, and clinical environment and processes. Patient-related predictors (24%) were communication ease, and physicians' perceptions of patients' motives; compassion was also less forthcoming with lower SES and minority patients. Evidence related to clinical predictors (15%) was scarce; high acuity presentations predicted greater ECRC.DiscussionThe growth of evidence in the recent years reflects ECRC's ongoing importance. However, evidence remains scattered, concentrates on physicians' factors that may not be amenable to interventions, lacks designs permitting causal commentary, and is limited by self-reported outcomes. Inconsistent findings in the direction of the predictors' effects indicate the need to study the relationships among predictors to better understand the mechanisms of ECRCs. The current review can guide future research and interventions.

Project description:BackgroundThe holistic concept of physical literacy assumes that individuals require adequate cognitive (knowledge and understanding), affective (motivation and confidence), and physical (physical competence) qualities to engage in lifelong physical activity behavior. In recent years, the research field has undergone rapid development and has also yielded an increasing number of interventions that aim to translate the theoretical-philosophical ideas into practical endeavors.ObjectiveThe goal of the present pre-registered systematic review was to (a) provide a general overview of evaluation studies on physical literacy interventions and (b) to quantitatively examine the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions.MethodsDrawing on the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched a total of 18 databases for physical literacy interventions. Inclusion criteria were English language, publication by November 2021, and interventions using physical literacy as a theoretical underpinning or evaluation outcome. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed with respect to their basic delivery characteristics, study quality, evaluation approach, and main findings. We additionally ran meta-analyses with all non-randomized and randomized controlled trials to examine and compare the effect of these interventions on five outcome categories: (i) physical competence, (ii) motivation and confidence, (iii) knowledge and understanding, (iv) physical activity behavior, and (v) total physical literacy. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effects on the different categories.ResultsThe screening process with two independent raters yielded 48 eligible interventions reported in 51 eligible articles. Quantitative evaluations most frequently addressed physical competence (72.2%), followed by motivation and confidence (47.2%), physical activity behavior (41.7%), and knowledge and understanding (33.3%). The controlled intervention studies (n = 24) exerted significant effects on all five physical literacy categories. Despite meaningful heterogeneity across the subgroups, the strongest effects were found for physical competence (SMD 0.90; 95% CI 0.55-1.25), followed by physical literacy aggregate scores (SMD 0.61; 95% CI 0.20-1.01), knowledge and understanding (SMD 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.79), physical activity behavior (SMD 0.39; 95% CI 0.23-0.55), and motivation and confidence (SMD 0.30; 95% CI 0.17-0.44).ConclusionsThe present study empirically demonstrated the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions on several outcomes relevant for promoting physical activity and health. To better inform current practices, future studies are advised to identify those program characteristics that significantly influence the effectiveness of physical literacy interventions.Clinical trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020188926.

Project description:BackgroundHip fracture is a common and debilitating injury amongst older adults. Fear of falling (FoF) and related constructs (balance confidence and falls efficacy) may impede rehabilitation after hip fracture. An updated systematic review to synthesize existing literature on FoF after hip fracture is needed. This review focussed on four research questions: In the hip fracture population: (1) What is the prevalence of FoF?; (2) What FoF assessment tools are validated? (3) What is the relationship between FoF and physical function?; (4) What interventions are effective for reducing FoF?MethodsA systematic search was undertaken in EBSCO Health, Scopus and PsychINFO in January 2021 (and updated December 2022) for articles on FoF after hip fracture. Data in relation to each research question was extracted and analysed. The quality of the studies was appraised using the 'Risk of Bias Tool for Prevalence Studies', 'COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for Patient-reported outcome measures', modified version of the 'Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional studies', and the 'Cochrane Risk of Bias 2' tools for each research question, respectively.Results36 studies (37 articles) with 5099 participants were included (mean age 80.2 years and average 78% female). Prevalence rates for FoF after hip fracture ranged between 22.5% and 100%, and prevalence tended to decrease as time progressed post hip fracture. The 'Falls Efficacy Scale - International' (FES-I) and 'Fear of Falling Questionnaire - Revised' (FFQ-R) were found to be reliable, internally consistent, and valid tools in hip fracture patients. FoF after hip fracture was consistently associated with measures of physical function including balance, gait speed, composite physical performance measures and self-reported function. Ten of 14 intervention studies were considered high risk of bias. Exercise-based interventions with or without a psychological component were not effective in reducing FoF after hip fracture compared to a control condition.ConclusionFoF is prevalent after hip fracture and is consistently associated with poorer physical function. Only two instruments (FES-I and FFQ-R) have been validated for measuring FoF in the hip fracture population. However, there remains a need for larger, higher quality randomised controlled trials targeting FoF after hip fracture in order to guide clinical practice.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration: CRD42020221836.

Dataset Information

'Measuring' Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings.

Publications

'Measuring' Physical Literacy and Related Constructs: A Systematic Review of Empirical Findings.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets