MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4251647461 · doi:10.2196/preprints.18522

Sedentariness and Back Health in Western Cape Primary School Students: Protocol for a Pragmatic Stepped-Wedge Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

2020· preprint· en· W4251647461 on OpenAlexaff
Dominic Fisher, Quinette Louw, Lehana Thabane

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSittingDynamismRandomized controlled trialCurriculumIntervention (counseling)Cluster randomised controlled trialMedicineFormalityPhysical therapyGerontologyPsychologyNursingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Despite growing evidence of deleterious health outcomes associated with sedentary behavior, prolonged static sitting in classrooms remains ubiquitous in primary schools. Sedentary behavior is associated with the development of cardio-metabolic conditions and poor back health. Preventative strategies to reduce sedentary behavior and its negative health effects may be required in a resource-constrained environment such as South Africa. OBJECTIVE The primary objective of this study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a full trial to evaluate the effects of a multifaceted intervention comprising novel multifunctional classroom furniture and a video-based curriculum versus usual care on sedentary behavior among students aged 10-11 years in primary schools. The secondary objective is to assess the preliminary effects of the intervention on sedentary behavior and postural dynamism. METHODS Eighty grade 5 or 6 students, aged 10 and 11 years, in mixed-gender schools within the Western Cape metropolitan urban area in Cape Town, South Africa are eligible to participate in this pilot cluster stepped-wedge trial design with classroom as the unit of randomization. Data will be collected at the schools. The intervention will comprise multifunctional classroom furniture that allows for sitting and standing as well as a video-based curriculum on sedentary behavior. Usual practice is the absence of the intervention. The primary outcomes assessed will be (1) adherence to the intervention and (2) project pragmatics. The secondary outcomes will be (1) sedentariness measured using activPAL3 microsensors and (2) postural dynamism measured using Noraxon Myomotion inertial measurement units. We randomized the school to the first or second start of the intervention. This is an open-label trial and therefore blinding will not be possible for any group. Descriptive analysis of the feasibility and physiological outcomes will be presented. We will report the preliminary estimates of the effects of the intervention on sedentariness and postural dynamism using the mean difference and 95% CI. RESULTS At the time of submission, two classrooms have been recruited into the study. Baseline physical activity and postural dynamism data have been collected from 10 participants from each class. CONCLUSIONS The results of this feasibility stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial will be useful in informing the design of the main trial to assess whether this multifaceted intervention of multifunctional classroom furniture that allows for sitting and standing as well as a video-based curriculum versus usual care has any effect on sedentary behavior in low-resource-setting primary schools. CLINICALTRIAL Pan African Trials Registry PACTR201811799476016; https://tinyurl.com/y4upoys8 INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR1-10.2196/18522

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0800.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChildren's Physical and Motor Development→French-language works237,207→