Dataset Information

What Drives Quality Physical Education? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Learning and Development Effects From Physical Education-Based Interventions

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine the effects of learning interventions aimed at optimizing the quality of physical education (PE) on psychomotor, cognitive, affective and social learning outcomes in children and adolescents.

Design

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data Sources

After searching PsycInfo, ERIC, and SportDiscus electronic databases, we identified 135 eligible studies published between January 1, 1995 to May 1, 2021.

Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies

We included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and controlled trials that assessed the effect of a PE-based intervention against one of the four identified learning domains in youth at school (aged 5–18 years).

Results

One hundred and thirty five (135) studies with over 42,500 participants and 193 calculated effect sizes were included in the study. The mean effect across all the learning and development outcomes was small to medium (Cohen's d = 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] (0.27–0.37). When adjusted for publication bias using the Duval and Tweedie Trim and Fill Method, this mean effect size increased to d = 0.40 (CI = 0.34–0.46). Effect sizes varied significantly based on learning and development outcomes. Interventions that consistently report above or below the mean d = 0.40 effect are identified based on learning outcome. The greatest effects across interventions were witnessed in psychomotor learning outcomes (d = 0.52) followed by affective (d = 0.47), social (d = 0.32), and cognitive (d = 0.17) learning outcomes. A minority (<10%) of PE interventions captured by this systematic review and meta-analysis reported having a negative effect on student learning and development.

Conclusion

The interventions with the greatest effects on student learning and development were dependant on the learning domains. Some PE interventions with a pedagogical focus such as games-based approaches, TARGET/Mastery Teaching, and Sport Education were found to be strong investments across multiple domains. The evidence is limited however by consistency in intervention dosage, study design, and data collection instruments. The study received no internal or external funding and was not prospectively registered.

SUBMITTER: Dudley D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9280720 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is a significant correlation between diet and delayed growth and development in children. However, the evidence for the crucial role of dietary interventions in children's growth and development health remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis sought to comprehensively evaluate the effects of nutritional interventions on children's physical development.MethodsArticles published from January 2007 to December 2022 were retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata/SE 16.0 software, as well as Review Manager 5.4 software.ResultsThe meta-analysis included a total of 8 original studies. The total sample comprised 6,645 children aged <8 years. The results of meta-analysis were as follows: (I) there was no significant difference in the body mass index (BMI)-for-age z scores between the nutritional intervention group and the control group [mean difference (MD) =0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.07, 0.30]. Thus, the nutritional interventions did not significantly improve the BMI-for-age z scores; (II) when the nutritional intervention period was <6 months, there was no significant difference in the weight-for-height z scores between the nutritional intervention group and the control group (MD =0.47, 95% CI: -0.07, 1.00), but when the nutritional intervention period was ≥6 months, the nutritional interventions significantly improved the weight-for-height z scores (MD =0.36, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.72); (III) a nutritional intervention period ≥6 months cannot significantly improved children's height-for-age z scores; (4) When the nutritional intervention period was <6 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the weight-for-age z scores between the nutritional intervention group and the control group (MD =-0.20, 95% CI: -0.60, 0.20), but when the nutritional intervention period was ≥6 months, the nutritional interventions significantly increased children's weight-for-age (mean difference =2.23, 95% CI: 0.01, 4.44).ConclusionsDifferent nutritional interventions had a slight improvement effect on children's physical growth and development. However, the effect of the short-term nutritional interventions (<6 months) was not obvious. In clinical practice, it is recommended that nutritional intervention programs be formulated that can be implemented for longer periods. However, due to the limited literature included, further research is needed.

Project description:BackgroundRecent years have witnessed the wide application of team-based learning(TBL) pedagogy in Chinese pharmacy education. However, the relevant systematic review evaluating the effects of such new pedagogical approach has not been established. The present study was designed to examine systematically the effect of using TBL approach in pharmacy education in China.MethodsSix databases were searched from the inception to January 2019. The studies reporting the performance of pharmacy students in Chinese university or college receiving TBL pedagogy compared to those receiving traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) were enrolled to be analyzed. Scores of the objective theoretical test were considered as the primary outcome, and the results from questionnaires about the number of students who approved the effects of TBL pedagogy on improving their learning enthusiasm, self-study ability, thinking ability, and communication skills were considered as the secondary outcome. A meta-analysis was conducted following the guidelines of the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement.ResultsA total of 1271 students in 12 studies published from 2013 to 2018 were enrolled in present analysis. Compared with traditional LBL pedagogy, TBL pedagogy exhibited more effectiveness in developing the objective tests scores of pharmacy students from both universities (SMD = 1.69, 95% CI [1.10, 2.28], p < 0.00001) and colleges (SMD = 4.37, 95% CI [1.33, 7.40], p < 0.00001), and such pedagogy applied well in experiments-oriented courses (SMD = 2.14, 95% CI [0.86, 3.43], p < 0.00001) and theory-oriented courses (SMD = 2.77, 95% CI [1.41, 4.14], p < 0.00001). In addition, it developed students' learning enthusiasm, students' self-study ability, thinking ability, and enhanced students' communication skills.ConclusionsTBL pedagogy has developed rapidly and applied widely in Chinese pharmacy education during the last decade. The results indicated that such novel pedagogy is compatible with the present situation of Chinese pharmacy education. And it could be considered as an effective method to enhance both the theoretical test scores and various abilities of Chinese pharmacy students.

Project description:Computer-based learning (CBL) has been widely used in medical education, and reports regarding its usage and effectiveness have ranged broadly. Most work has been done on the effectiveness of CBL approaches versus traditional methods, and little has been done on the comparative effects of CBL versus CBL methodologies. These findings urged other authors to recommend such studies in hopes of improving knowledge about which CBL methods work best in which settings.In this systematic review, we aimed to characterize recent studies of the development of software platforms and interventions in medical education, search for common points among studies, and assess whether recommendations for CBL research are being taken into consideration.We conducted a systematic review of the literature published from 2003 through 2013. We included studies written in English, specifically in medical education, regarding either the development of instructional software or interventions using instructional software, during training or practice, that reported learner attitudes, satisfaction, knowledge, skills, or software usage. We conducted 2 latent class analyses to group articles according to platform features and intervention characteristics. In addition, we analyzed references and citations for abstracted articles.We analyzed 251 articles. The number of publications rose over time, and they encompassed most medical disciplines, learning settings, and training levels, totaling 25 different platforms specifically for medical education. We uncovered 4 latent classes for educational software, characteristically making use of multimedia (115/251, 45.8%), text (64/251, 25.5%), Web conferencing (54/251, 21.5%), and instructional design principles (18/251, 7.2%). We found 3 classes for intervention outcomes: knowledge and attitudes (175/212, 82.6%), knowledge, attitudes, and skills (11.8%), and online activity (12/212, 5.7%). About a quarter of the articles (58/227, 25.6%) did not hold references or citations in common with other articles. The number of common references and citations increased in articles reporting instructional design principles (P=.03), articles measuring online activities (P=.01), and articles citing a review by Cook and colleagues on CBL (P=.04). There was an association between number of citations and studies comparing CBL versus CBL, independent of publication date (P=.02).Studies in this field vary highly, and a high number of software systems are being developed. It seems that past recommendations regarding CBL interventions are being taken into consideration. A move into a more student-centered model, a focus on implementing reusable software platforms for specific learning contexts, and the analysis of online activity to track and predict outcomes are relevant areas for future research in this field.

Project description:BackgroundAbout 70% of children and adolescents worldwide do not meet the recommended level of physical activity (PA), which is closely associated with physical, psychological, and cognitive well-being. Nowadays, the use of technologies to change PA is of interest due to the need for novel, more effective intervention approaches. The previous meta-analyses have examined smartphone-based interventions and their impact on PA in adults, but evidence in children and adolescents still needs further research.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of smartphone-based interventions for improving PA in children and adolescents.MethodsFive electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, OVID, Scopus, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched up to June 29, 2020. Randomized controlled trials with a control group that examine the effect of smartphone interventions on PA among children and adolescents were included. Bias risks were assessed using the Cochrane collaboration tool. Meta-analysis was performed to assess the pooled effect on PA using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the potential modifying effects of different factors (eg, types of intervention, intervention duration, age, measurement, study quality).ResultsA total of 9 studies were included in this review, including 4 mobile app interventions, 3 SMS text messaging interventions, and 2 app + SMS text messaging interventions. In general, the risk of bias of included studies was low. Compared with the control group, the use of smartphone intervention significantly improved PA (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.44, 95% CI 0.11-0.77, P=.009), especially for total PA (TPA; weighted mean difference [WMD] 32.35, 95% CI 10.36-54.33, P=.004) and daily steps (WMD 1185, 95% CI 303-2068, P=.008), but not for moderate-to-vigorous PA (WMD 3.91, 95% CI -1.99 to 9.81, P=.19). High statistical heterogeneity was detected (I2=73.9%, P<.001) for PA. Meta-regression showed that duration (β=-.08, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.01, n=16) was a potential factor for high heterogeneity. The results of subgroup analyses indicated that app intervention (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.23-1.30, P=.005), children (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.10-1.18, P=.02), "≤8 weeks" (SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.23-1.30, P=.005), objective measurement (SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.09-0.91, P=.02), and low risk of bias (SMD 0.96, 95% CI 0.38-1.54, P=.001) can significantly improve PA.ConclusionsThe evidence of meta-analysis shows that smartphone-based intervention may be a promising strategy to increase TPA and steps in children and adolescents. Currently, app intervention may be a more effective strategy among smartphone intervention technologies. To extend the promise of smartphone intervention, the future needs to design comparative trials among different smartphone technologies.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42019148261; https://tinyurl.com/y5modsrd.

Project description:BackgroundBlended learning, which combines face-to-face learning and e-learning, has grown rapidly to be commonly used in education. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this learning approach has not been completely quantitatively synthesized and evaluated using knowledge outcomes in health education.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of blended learning compared to that of traditional learning in health education.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of blended learning in health education in MEDLINE from January 1990 to July 2019. We independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and compared overall blended learning versus traditional learning, offline blended learning versus traditional learning, online blended learning versus traditional learning, digital blended learning versus traditional learning, computer-aided instruction blended learning versus traditional learning, and virtual patient blended learning versus traditional learning. All pooled analyses were based on random-effect models, and the I2 statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity across studies.ResultsA total of 56 studies (N=9943 participants) assessing several types of learning support in blended learning met our inclusion criteria; 3 studies investigated offline support, 7 studies investigated digital support, 34 studies investigated online support, 8 studies investigated computer-assisted instruction support, and 5 studies used virtual patient support for blended learning. The pooled analysis comparing all blended learning to traditional learning showed significantly better knowledge outcomes for blended learning (standardized mean difference 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28, I2=94.3%). Similar results were observed for online (standardized mean difference 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.86, I2=94.9%), computer-assisted instruction (standardized mean difference 1.13, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.79, I2=78.0%), and virtual patient (standardized mean difference 0.62, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.06, I2=78.4%) learning support, but results for offline learning support (standardized mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.79, I2=87.9%) and digital learning support (standardized mean difference 0.04, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.52, I2=93.4%) were not significant.ConclusionsFrom this review, blended learning demonstrated consistently better effects on knowledge outcomes when compared with traditional learning in health education. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and to explore the utility of different design variants of blended learning.