Dataset Information

Effects of the Learning Together intervention on bullying and aggression in English secondary schools (INCLUSIVE): a cluster randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Bullying, aggression, and violence among children and young people are some of the most consequential public mental health problems. We tested the Learning Together intervention, which involved students in efforts to modify their school environment using restorative practice and by developing social and emotional skills.

Methods

We did a cluster randomised trial, with economic and process evaluations, of the Learning Together intervention compared with standard practice (controls) over 3 years in secondary schools in south-east England. Learning Together consisted of staff training in restorative practice; convening and facilitating a school action group; and a student social and emotional skills curriculum. Primary outcomes were self-reported experience of bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale; GBS) and perpetration of aggression (Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) school misbehaviour subscale) measured at 36 months. We analysed data using intention-to-treat longitudinal mixed-effects models. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (10751359).

Findings

We included 40 schools (20 in each group); no schools withdrew. 6667 (93·6%) of 7121 students participated at baseline and 5960 (83·3%) of 7154 at 36 months. Mean GBS bullying score at 36 months was 0·34 (SE 0·02) in the control group versus 0·29 (SE 0·02) in the intervention group, with a significant adjusted mean difference (-0·03, 95% CI -0·06 to -0·001; adjusted effect size -0·08). Mean ESYTC score at 36 months was 4·33 (SE 0·20) in the control group versus 4·04 (0·21) in the intervention group, with no evidence of a difference between groups (adjusted difference -0·13, 95% CI -0·43 to 0·18; adjusted effect size -0·03). Costs were an additional £58 per pupil in intervention schools than in control schools.

Interpretation

Learning Together had small but significant effects on bullying, which could be important for public health, but no effect on aggression. Interventions to promote student health by modifying the whole-school environment are likely to be one of the most feasible and efficient ways of addressing closely related risk and health outcomes in children and young people.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research, Educational Endowment Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Bonell C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6286420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:There are increasing rates of internalising difficulties, particularly anxiety and depression, being reported in children and young people in England. School-based, universal prevention programmes are thought to be one way of helping tackle such difficulties. This protocol describes a four-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, investigating the effectiveness of three different interventions when compared to usual provision, in English primary and secondary pupils. The primary outcome for Mindfulness and Relaxation interventions is a measure of internalising difficulties, while Strategies for Safety and Wellbeing will be examined in relation to intended help-seeking. In addition to the effectiveness analysis, a process and implementation evaluation and a cost-effectiveness evaluation will be undertaken. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Overall, 160 primary schools and 64 secondary schools will be recruited across England. This corresponds to 17,600 participants. Measures will be collected online at baseline, 3-6 months later, and 9-12?months after the commencement of the intervention. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Moreover, a process and implementation evaluation (including a qualitative research component) will explore several aspects of implementation (fidelity, quality, dosage, reach, participant responsiveness, adaptations), social validity (acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility), and their moderating effects on the outcomes of interest, and perceived impact. DISCUSSION:This trial aims to address important questions about whether schools' practices around the promotion of mental wellbeing and the prevention of mental health problems can: (1) be formalised into feasible and effective models of school-based support and (2) whether these practices and their effects can be sustained over time. Given the focus of these interventions on mirroring popular practice in schools and on prioritising approaches that present low-burden, high-acceptability to schools, if proved effective, and cost-effective, the findings will indicate models that are not only empirically tested but also offer high potential for widespread use and, therefore, potentially widespread benefits beyond the life of the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN16386254. Registered on 30 August 2018.

Project description:ObjectivesAssess feasibility, acceptability and costs of delivering a physically active lessons (PAL) training programme to secondary school teachers and explore preliminary effectiveness for reducing pupils' sedentary time.Design and settingSecondary schools in East England; one school participated in a pre-post feasibility study, two in a pilot cluster-randomised controlled trial. In the pilot trial, blinding to group assignment was not possible.ParticipantsAcross studies, 321 randomly selected students (51% male; mean age: 12.9 years), 78 teachers (35% male) and 2 assistant head teachers enrolled; 296 (92%) students, 69 (88%) teachers and 2 assistant head teachers completed the studies.InterventionPAL training was delivered to teachers over two after-school sessions. Teachers were made aware of how to integrate movement into lessons; strategies included students collecting data from the environment for class activities and completing activities posted on classroom walls, instead of sitting at desks.Primary and secondary outcomesQuantitative and qualitative data were collected to assess feasibility and acceptability of PAL training and delivery. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and ~8 weeks post-training; measures included accelerometer-assessed activity, self-reported well-being and observations of time-on-task. Process evaluation was conducted at follow-up.ResultsIn the feasibility study, teachers reported good acceptability of PAL training and mixed experiences of delivering PAL. In the pilot study, teachers' acceptability of training was lower and teachers identified aspects of the training in need of review, including the outdoor PAL training and learning challenge of PAL strategies. In both studies, students and assistant head teachers reported good acceptability of the intervention. Preliminary effectiveness for reducing students' sedentary time was not demonstrated in either study.ConclusionsNo evidence of preliminary effectiveness on the primary outcome and mixed reports of teachers' acceptability of PAL training suggest the need to review the training. The results do not support continuation of research with the current intervention.Trial registration numberISRCTN38409550.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical Activity 4 Everyone (PA4E1) is an evidence-based program effective at increasing adolescent physical activity (PA) and improving weight status. This study aimed to determine a) the effectiveness of an adapted implementation intervention to scale-up PA4E1 at 24-month follow-up, b) fidelity and reach, and c) the cost and cost-effectiveness of the implementation support intervention.MethodsA cluster randomised controlled trial using a type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness design in 49 lower socio-economic secondary schools, randomised to a program (n = 24) or control group (n = 25). An adapted implementation intervention consisting of seven strategies was developed to support schools to implement PA4E1 over 24-months. The primary outcome was the proportion of schools implementing at least four of the 7 PA practices, assessed via computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) with Head Physical Education Teachers. Secondary outcomes included the mean number of PA practices implemented, fidelity and reach, cost and cost-effectiveness. Logistic regression models assessed program effects.ResultsAt baseline, no schools implemented four of the 7 PA practices. At 24-months, significantly more schools in the program group (16/23, 69.6%) implemented at least four of the 7 PA practices than the control group (0/25, 0%) (p < 0.001). At 24-months, program schools were implementing an average of 3.6 more practices than control schools (4.1 (1.7) vs. 0.5 (0.8), respectively) (P < 0.001). Fidelity and reach of the implementation intervention were high (> 75%). The total cost of the program was $415,112 AUD (2018) ($17,296 per school; $117.30 per student).ConclusionsThe adapted implementation intervention provides policy makers and researchers with an effective and potentially cost-effective model for scaling-up the delivery of PA4E1 in secondary schools. Further assessment of sustainability is warranted.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000681358 prospectively registered 12th May 2017.

Project description:BackgroundSchool-based COVID-19 contacts in England have been asked to self-isolate at home, missing key educational opportunities. We trialled daily testing of contacts as an alternative to assess whether this resulted in similar control of transmission, while allowing more school attendance.MethodsWe did an open-label, cluster-randomised, controlled trial in secondary schools and further education colleges in England. Schools were randomly assigned (1:1) to self-isolation of school-based COVID-19 contacts for 10 days (control) or to voluntary daily lateral flow device (LFD) testing for 7 days with LFD-negative contacts remaining at school (intervention). Randomisation was stratified according to school type and size, presence of a sixth form, presence of residential students, and proportion of students eligible for free school meals. Group assignment was not masked during procedures or analysis. Coprimary outcomes in all students and staff were COVID-19-related school absence and symptomatic PCR-confirmed COVID-19, adjusted for community case rates, to estimate within-school transmission (non-inferiority margin <50% relative increase). Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis using quasi-Poisson regression, also estimating complier average causal effects (CACE). This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18100261.FindingsBetween March 18 and May 4, 2021, 204 schools were taken through the consent process, during which three decided not to participate further. 201 schools were randomly assigned (control group n=99, intervention group n=102) in the 10-week study (April 19-May 10, 2021), which continued until the pre-appointed stop date (June 27, 2021). 76 control group schools and 86 intervention group schools actively participated; additional national data allowed most non-participating schools to be included in analysis of coprimary outcomes. 2432 (42·4%) of 5763 intervention group contacts participated in daily contact testing. There were 657 symptomatic PCR-confirmed infections during 7 782 537 days-at-risk (59·1 per 100 000 per week) in the control group and 740 during 8 379 749 days-at-risk (61·8 per 100 000 per week) in the intervention group (intention-to-treat adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·75-1·22]; p=0·72; CACE aIRR 0·86 [0·55-1·34]). Among students and staff, there were 59 422 (1·62%) COVID-19-related absences during 3 659 017 person-school-days in the control group and 51 541 (1·34%) during 3 845 208 person-school-days in the intervention group (intention-to-treat aIRR 0·80 [95% CI 0·54-1·19]; p=0·27; CACE aIRR 0·61 [0·30-1·23]).InterpretationDaily contact testing of school-based contacts was non-inferior to self-isolation for control of COVID-19 transmission, with similar rates of symptomatic infections among students and staff with both approaches. Infection rates in school-based contacts were low, with very few school contacts testing positive. Daily contact testing should be considered for implementation as a safe alternative to home isolation following school-based exposures.FundingUK Government Department of Health and Social Care.

Project description:BackgroundDepression and anxiety are increasingly prevalent in adolescents. The Brief Educational Workshops in Secondary Schools Trial investigated the effectiveness of a brief self-referral stress workshop programme for sixth-form students aged 16-18 years old.ObjectiveThis study conducted a secondary analysis on the outcomes of participants with elevated depressive symptoms at baseline.MethodsThis is an England-wide, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a brief cognitive-behavioural therapy workshop (DISCOVER) compared with treatment-as-usual (TAU) (1:1). The primary outcome was depression symptoms (Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ)) at 6-month follow-up, using the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and analysed with a multilevel linear regression estimating a between-group adjusted mean difference (aMD). Cost-effectiveness, taking a National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services perspective, was explored using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).FindingsBetween 4 October 2021 and 10 November 2022, 900 adolescents at 57 schools were enrolled. 314 students were identified as having elevated symptoms of depression at baseline (>27 on MFQ). In this prespecified subgroup, the DISCOVER arm included 142 participants and TAU included 172. ITT analysis included 298 participants. Primary analysis at 6 months found aMD to be -3.88 (95% CI -6.48, -1.29; Cohen's d=-0.52; p=0.003), with a similar reduction at 3 months (aMD=-4.00; 95% CI -6.58, -1.42; Cohen's d=0.53; p=0.002), indicating a moderate, clinically meaningful effect in the DISCOVER arm. We found an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £5255 per QALY, with a probability of DISCOVER being cost-effective at between 89% and 95% compared with TAU.Conclusions and clinical implicationsDISCOVER is clinically effective and cost-effective in those with elevated depressive symptoms. This intervention could be used as an early school-based intervention by the NHS.Trial registration numberISRCTN90912799.

Project description:The World Health Organisation advocates a direct focus on adolescent men in reducing adolescent pregnancy; however, no trials have been conducted. This trial (ISRCTN11632300; NCT02092480) determines whether a novel Relationship and Sexuality Educational intervention, If I Were Jack, is acceptable and feasible to implement in mixed sex UK classrooms. The intervention is a teacher-delivered intervention that emphasises male alongside female responsibility in preventing unintended pregnancies and is designed to prevent unprotected sex. The trial was a parallel-group cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial with embedded process and cost evaluation in eight secondary schools (unit of randomisation) among 831 pupils (mean age 14) in Northern Ireland, alongside a qualitative evaluation of transferability in ten schools in Scotland, Wales and England. The sampling strategy was a maximum variation quota sample designed to capture a range of school management types. Four schools were randomised to each arm and the control arm continued with usual practice. Study duration was 12 months (from November 2014), with follow-up 9 months post-baseline. Results demonstrated that the intervention was acceptable to schools, pupils and teachers, and could be feasibly implemented, cost-effectively, with minor enhancements. The between-group difference in incidence of unprotected sex (primary outcome at pupil level) of 1.3% (95% CI 0.5-2.2) by 9 months demonstrated a potential effect size consistent with those reported to have had meaningful impact on teenage pregnancy. The study responds to global health policy for a paradigm shift towards inclusion of men in the achievement of sexual and reproductive health goals in a practical way by demonstrating that a gender-sensitive as well as a gender transformative intervention targeting males to prevent teenage pregnancy is acceptable to adolescent men and women and implementable in formal education structures. If I Were Jack now merits further effectiveness testing.

Project description:BackgroundBangladesh is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate change. People are getting educated at different levels on how to deal with potential impacts. One such educational mode was the preparation of a school manual, for high school students on climate change and health protection endorsed by the National Curriculum and Textbook Board, which is based on a 2008 World Health Organization manual. The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of the manual in increasing the knowledge level of the school children about climate change and health adaptation.MethodsThis cluster randomized intervention trial involved 60 schools throughout Bangladesh, with 3293 secondary school students participating. School upazilas (sub-districts) were randomised into intervention and control groups, and two schools from each upazila were randomly selected. All year seven students from both groups of schools sat for a pre-test of 30 short questions of binary response. A total of 1515 students from 30 intervention schools received the intervention through classroom training based on the school manual and 1778 students of the 30 control schools did not get the manual but a leaflet on climate change and health issues. Six months later, a post-intervention test of the same questionnaire used in the pre-test was performed at both intervention and control schools. The pre and post test scores were analysed along with the demographic data by using random effects model.ResultsNone of the various school level and student level variables were significantly different between the control and intervention group. However, the intervention group had a 17.42% (95% CI: 14.45 to 20.38, P = <0.001) higher score in the post-test after adjusting for pre-test score and other covariates in a multi-level linear regression model.ConclusionsThese results suggest that school-based intervention for climate change and health adaptation is effective for increasing the knowledge level of school children on this topic.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Children and adolescents spend a lot of time sitting at school. Implementing standing desks in the classroom is one potential strategy to reduce and break up sitting time. The first aim was to evaluate the effect of implementing standing desks in classrooms in primary and secondary schools on pupils' sitting-related behaviour and determinants. The second aim was to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the process of implementing the desks in the classroom. METHODS:We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial with a pre-, mid-, and post-test design including 10 intervention schools (5 primary, 5 secondary schools) and 9 control schools (5 primary, 4 secondary schools) across Flanders, Belgium. Three standing desks were placed in one class in each intervention school for 6 months. At pre-, mid- and post-test, all pupils (n?=?311; 54.5% girls) completed a questionnaire whilst a subsample of three pupils per class wore an activPAL inclinometer for one school week. Focus groups with pupils and interviews with teachers were conducted at mid-test. Process evaluation questions were added to the mid- and post-test questionnaire for the intervention group. Qualitative data were analysed using NVivo 11. Multilevel regression analyses were conducted in MLwiN 2.31. RESULTS:Few significant intervention effects were observed, although activPAL data showed favourable intervention effects on primary school pupils' sitting and standing time and bouts. Focus groups and interviews showed a generally positive attitude towards using standing desks in both teachers and pupils, although some barriers and suggestions for future implementation were noted, for example regarding the amount of desks per classroom. Quantitative process evaluation data showed a low individual use of standing desks (between 57 and 83 min per week), which significantly decreased across the school year for primary school pupils only. CONCLUSIONS:Although pupils and teachers were generally positive about the desks, relatively few intervention effects were found. Future studies should consider how to optimise the use of standing desks in classrooms to impact on sitting time, by for example, determining the most feasible intervention design and by encouraging the continued use of standing desks throughout the school year. Moreover, additional intervention strategies (e.g. educational strategies) might be needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03163004 . ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered 22 May 2017 (retrospectively registered).