MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410001862 · doi:10.1186/s12966-025-01749-0

Impact of a multi-component implementation strategy to increase outdoor free play opportunities in early childhood education and care (ECEC) services: the get outside get active (GOGA) randomised controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4410001862 on OpenAlex
Sze Lin Yoong, Nicole Pearson, Luke Giles, Hannah Lamont, Luke Wolfenden, Jannah Jones, Christophe Lecathelinais, Patti‐Jean Naylor, Anthony D. Okely, Nicole Nathan, Kathryn Reilly, R. Lorch, John Wiggers, Jacklyn Jackson, Melanie Lum, Karen Gillham, Alice Grady

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Therapy and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersMedical Research CouncilHunter New England Local Health DistrictNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Heart Foundation of AustraliaWellcome Trust
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialComponent (thermodynamics)Early childhoodEarly childhood educationMedicineClinical nutritionPhysical therapyPsychologyNursingPedagogyDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Increased outdoor free play is associated with health and developmental benefits for preschool-aged children. It is therefore recommended that early childhood education and care (ECEC) services provide increased time for outdoor free play. This study seeks to understand the impact of a multi-component implementation strategy (Get Outside Get Active) on ECEC service provision of opportunities for outdoor free play. METHODS: This was a parallel-group randomised controlled trial involving 84 ECEC services located in one region of New South Wales, Australia. Forty-one services were randomised to a 6-month multi-component implementation strategy or to a usual care group (n = 43). To increase total scheduled outdoor free play time, services were supported to modify their routines to increase provision of outdoor free play and/or indoor-outdoor free play opportunities (whereby children are allowed to move freely between indoor and outdoor spaces). The primary trial outcome, mean minutes per day of outdoor free play opportunities provided in ECEC services, was measured at baseline, 6-months (primary endpoint), and 18-months. Secondary outcomes were mean minutes of indoor-outdoor free play only and proportion implementing indoor-outdoor free play for the full day. The quality of the movement environment was assessed using direct observations in 30 ECECs at 6 months only. RESULTS: At 6 months, the intervention group showed a significant increase in mean daily minutes of outdoor free play (61.3 min; 95% CI 2.5 to 120.01; p = 0.041) and indoor-outdoor free play (59.1 min; 95% CI 9.1 to 109.1; p = 0.021) relative to the control group. However, no significant between-group differences were observed at 18 months. The proportion implementing a full-day indoor-outdoor program (OR 1.97; 95% CI 0.81 to 4.78; p = 0.196) and the quality of movement environments did not differ between groups at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation strategy significantly increased outdoor free play opportunities in ECEC services post-intervention, though the between group effects were not sustained at 18 months. Future research should focus on ensuring the long-term impact of implementation strategies and understanding the factors driving changes in control group behaviour. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000987864).

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.361 · 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