Dataset Information

Effects of a school-based physical activity intervention on academic performance in 14-year old adolescents: a cluster randomized controlled trial - the School in Motion study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

School-based physical activity interventions evaluating the effect on academic performance usually includes children. We aimed to investigate the effect of a nine-month, school-based physical activity intervention titled School in Motion (ScIM) on academic performance in adolescents.

Methods

Thirty secondary schools in Norway were cluster-randomized into three groups: the Physically active learning (PAL) group (n = 10), the Don't worry - Be Happy (DWBH) group (n = 10) or control (n = 10). Target dose in both intervention groups was 120 min/week of additional PA during school hours. Parental consent was obtained from 2084 adolescent students (76%). Standardized national tests in reading and numeracy was conducted at baseline and at the end of the intervention. We used linear mixed model to test intervention effects. We found significant intervention effects in numeracy and reading among students in both interventions when compared with controls.

Results

The mean difference in change in numeracy was 1.7 (95% CI: 0.9 to 2.5; Cohen's d = 0.12) and 2.0 (95% CI: 1.4 to 2.7; Cohen's d = 0.23) points in favour of students in the PAL and DWBH intervention, respectively. Similar results were found for reading, where the mean difference in change was 0.9 (95% CI 0.2 to 1.6; Cohen's d = 0.06) and 1.1 (95% CI 0.3 to 1.9; Cohen's d = 0.18) points in favour of students in the PAL and DWBH intervention, respectively. When conducting intention to treat analysis with imputed data the estimates were attenuated and some no longer significant.

Conclusion

The ScIM study demonstrates that two different school-based PA interventions providing approximately 120 min of additional PA weekly over nine months, significantly improved numeracy and reading performance in 14-year old students compared with controls. However, the results should be interpreted with caution as the effect sizes reported were very small or small and the estimates were attenuated when conducting intention to treat analysis. Despite this, our results are still positive and suggest that PA interventions are viable models to increase academic performance among adolescents.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered (25/01/2019): NCT03817047 .

SUBMITTER: Solberg RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8101111 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhysical activity is associated not only with health-related parameters, but also with cognitive and academic performance. However, no large scale school-based physical activity interventions have investigated effects on cognitive performance in adolescents. The aim of this study was to describe the effectiveness of a school-based physical activity intervention in enhancing cognitive performance in 12-14 years old adolescents.MethodsA 20 week cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted including seven intervention and seven control schools. A total of 632 students (mean (SD) age: 12.9 (0.6) years) completed the trial with baseline and follow-up data on primary or secondary outcomes (74% of randomized subjects). The intervention targeted physical activity during academic subjects, recess, school transportation and leisure-time. Cognitive performance was assessed using an executive functions test of inhibition (flanker task) with the primary outcomes being accuracy and reaction time on congruent and incongruent trials. Secondary outcomes included mathematics performance, physical activity levels, body-mass index, waist-circumference and cardiorespiratory fitness.ResultsNo significant difference in change, comparing the intervention group to the control group, was observed on the primary outcomes (p's>0.05) or mathematics skills (p>0.05). An intervention effect was found for cardiorespiratory fitness in girls (21 meters (95% CI: 4.4-38.6) and body-mass index in boys (-0.22 kg/m2 (95% CI: -0.39-0.05). Contrary to our predictions, a significantly larger change in interference control for reaction time was found in favor of the control group (5.0 milliseconds (95% CI: 0-9). Baseline to mid-intervention changes in physical activity levels did not differ significantly between groups (all p's>0.05).ConclusionsNo evidence was found for effectiveness of a 20-week multi-faceted school-based physical activity intervention for enhancing executive functioning or mathematics skills compared to a control group, but low implementation fidelity precludes interpretation of the causal relationship.Trial registrationwww.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02012881.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical activity (PA) declines throughout adolescence, therefore PA promotion during this period is important. We analyzed the effect of two school-based PA interventions on daily PA levels, cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and muscle strength among adolescents.MethodsFor the nine-month School in Motion intervention study (ScIM), we cluster-randomized 30 Norwegian secondary schools (N = 2084, mean age [SD] = 14 [0.3] years) to one of three study arms. The physically active learning (PAL) intervention included 30 min physically active learning, 30 min PA and a 60 min physical education (PE) lesson per week. The Don't worry-Be happy (DWBH) intervention included a 60 min PA lesson and a 60 min PE lesson per week, both tailored to promote friendships and wellbeing. Both intervention arms were designed to engage the adolescents in 120 min of PA per week in addition to recess and mandatory PE lessons. The control group continued as per usual, including the standard amount of mandatory PE. PA (main outcome) was assessed by accelerometers, CRF and muscle strength (secondary outcomes) were assessed by an intermittent running test and selected tests from the Eurofit test battery.ResultsDaily PA and time spent in moderate- to vigorous-intensity PA (MVPA) decreased in all groups throughout the intervention. The mean difference in PA level and MVPA for participants in the PAL-intervention arm was 34.7 cpm (95% CI: 4.1, 65.3) and 4.7 min/day (95% CI: 0.6, 8.8) higher, respectively, compared to the control arm. There were no significant intervention effects on daily PA level, MVPA or time spent sedentary for adolescents in the DWBH-intervention arm. Adolescents in the PAL-intervention arm increased distance covered in the running test compared to controls (19.8 m, 95% CI: 10.4, 29.1), whilst a negative intervention effect was observed among adolescents in the DWBH-intervention arm (- 11.6 m, 95% CI: - 22.0, - 1.1).ConclusionThe PAL-intervention resulted in a significantly smaller decrease in daily PA level, time spent in MVPA, and increased CRF compared to controls. Our results indicate that a teacher-led intervention, including three unique intervention components, is effective in curbing the decline in PA observed across our cohort and improving CRF.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID nr: NCT03817047 . Registered 01/25/2019 'retrospectively registered'.

Project description:BackgroundActive travel and school settings are considered ideal for promoting physical activity. However, previous research suggests limited effect of school-based interventions on overall physical activity levels among adolescents. The relationship between physical activity in different domains remains inconclusive. In this study, we examined the effects of adding two weekly hours of school-based physical activity on active travel rates.MethodWe analyzed data from 1370 pupils in the 9th-grade participating in the cluster RCT; the School In Motion (ScIM) project. Intervention schools (n = 19) implemented 120 min of class-scheduled physical activity and physical education, in addition to the normal 2 hours of weekly physical education in the control schools (n = 9), for 9 months. Active travel was defined as pupils who reported walking or cycling to school, while motorized travel was defined as pupils who commuted by bus or car, during the spring/summer half of the year (April-September), or autumn/winter (October-February). The participants were categorized based on their travel mode from pretest to posttest as; maintained active or motorized travel ("No change"), changing to active travel (motorized-active), or changing to motorized travel (active-motorized). Multilevel logistic regression was used to analyze the intervention effect on travel mode.ResultsDuring the intervention period, most participants maintained their travel habits. In total, 91% of pupils maintained their travel mode to school. Only 6% of pupils switched to motorized travel and 3% switched to active travel, with small variations according to season and trip direction. The intervention did not seem to influence the likelihood of changing travel mode. The odds ratios for changing travel habits in spring/summer season were from active to motorized travel 1.19 [95%CI: 0.53-2.15] and changing from motorized to active travel 1.18 [0.30-2.62], compared to the "No change" group. These findings were consistent to and from school, and for the autumn/winter season.ConclusionThe extra school-based physical activity does not seem to affect rates of active travel among adolescents in the ScIM project.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ID nr: NCT03817047. Registered 01/25/2019' retrospectively registered'.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate bidirectional associations between (prolonged) sitting time and sleep duration in 12- to 14-year-old adolescents using a between-subjects and within-subjects analyses approach.MethodsObservational data were used from 108 adolescents (53% girls; mean age 12.9 (SD 0.7) years) from six schools in Flanders, Belgium. The Axivity AX3 triaxial accelerometer, worn on the thigh, was used to assess daily total sitting time and daily time spent in sedentary bouts of ≥30 min (as a proxy for prolonged sitting time). The Fitbit Charge 3 was used to assess nightly sleep duration. Both monitors were worn on schooldays only (ranging from 4 to 5 days). Linear mixed models were conducted to analyse the associations, resulting in four models. In each model, the independent variable (sleep duration, sitting time or prolonged sitting time) was included as within- as well as between-subjects factor.ResultsWithin-subjects analyses showed that when the adolescents sat more and when the adolescents spent more time sitting in bouts of ≥30 min than they usually did on a given day, they slept less during the following night (p = 0.01 and p = 0.05 (borderline significant), respectively). These associations were not significant in the other direction. Between-subjects analyses showed that adolescents who slept more on average, spent less time sitting (p = 0.006) and less time sitting in bouts of ≥30 min (p = 0.004) compared with adolescents who slept less on average. Conversely, adolescents who spent more time sitting on average and adolescents who spent more time sitting in bouts of ≥30 min on average, slept less (p = 0.02 and p = 0.003, respectively).ConclusionsBased on the between-subjects analyses, interventions focusing on reducing or regularly breaking up sitting time could improve adolescents' sleep duration on a population level, and vice versa. However, the within-subjects association was only found in one direction and suggests that to sleep sufficiently during the night, adolescents might limit and regularly break up their sitting time the preceding day.Trial registrationData have been used from our trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04327414 ; registered on March 11, 2020).