MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387931706 · doi:10.1093/heapro/daad140

Objectively assessed school-based intervention to reduce children’s sedentary time: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4387931706 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Bernal, Léna Lhuisset, Nicolas Fabre, François Trudeau, Julien Bois

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion International · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)Component (thermodynamics)MedicineSystematic reviewMedical educationPsychologyGerontologyMEDLINENursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Childhood is a period characterized by a constant increase in sedentary time (ST) but also provides a great window of opportunity for children to learn how to limit ST. As a result, school-based interventions aimed at reducing and preventing children's ST are increasingly becoming more widespread. A previous review found that school-based multi-component interventions appeared to be more effective in comparison to those based on a single component. However, this conclusion was based on just 11 studies published before 2016 and needs to be verified due to the currently growing number of studies on this topic. The objective of this systematic review is to update the evaluation of the effectiveness of school-based interventions published since the previous review according to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between August 2015 and August 2023 containing objective measures of ST were analyzed. Of the 18 studies identified, 11 (61.1%) reported significant positive results. Multi-component studies were slightly more effective than their single-component equivalent (63.7% vs. 57.1%). The components that proved the most effective of the multi-component studies were the implementation of sit-to-stand desks (100%), and teachers' training (77.8%). The combination of these two components is the most promising method to limit ST in the school context. Future research should determine how sit-to-stand desks can be introduced into the class environment and how courses can be adapted to this material.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.006

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion InternationalSame topicObesity, Physical Activity, DietFrench-language works237,207