Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Study protocol

An Internet-supported Physical Activity Intervention Delivered in Secondary Schools Located in Low Socio-economic Status Communities: Study Protocol for the Activity and Motivation in Physical Education (AMPED) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial 

Authors: Chris Lonsdale, Aidan Lester, Katherine B. Owen, Rhiannon L. White, Ian Moyes, Louisa Peralta, Morwenna Kirwan, Anthony Maeder, Andrew Bennie, Freya MacMillan, Gregory S. Kolt, Nikos Ntoumanis, Jennifer M. Gore, Ester Cerin, Thierno M.O. Diallo, Dylan P. Cliff, David R. Lubans

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

School-based physical education is an important public health initiative as it has the potential to provide students with regular opportunities to participate in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Unfortunately, in many physical education lessons students do not engage in sufficient MVPA to achieve health benefits. In this trial we will test the efficacy of a teacher professional development intervention, delivered partially via the Internet, on secondary school students’ MVPA during physical education lessons. Teaching strategies covered in this training are designed to (i) maximize opportunities for students to be physically active during lessons and (ii) enhance students’ autonomous motivation towards physical activity.

Method

A two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial with allocation at the school level (intervention vs. usual care control). Teachers and Year 8 students in government-funded secondary schools in low socio-economic areas of the Western Sydney region of Australia will be eligible to participate. During the main portion of the intervention (6 months), teachers will participate in two workshops and complete two implementation tasks at their school. Implementation tasks will involve video-based self-reflection via the project’s Web 2.0 platform and an individualized feedback meeting with a project mentor. Each intervention school will also complete two group peer-mentoring sessions at their school (one per term) in which they will discuss implementation with members of their school physical education staff. In the booster period (3 months), teachers will complete a half-day workshop at their school, plus one online implementation task, and a group mentoring session at their school. Throughout the entire intervention period (main intervention plus booster period), teachers will have access to online resources. Data collection will include baseline, post-intervention (7–8 months after baseline) and maintenance phase (14–15 months after baseline) assessments. Research assistants blinded to group allocation will collect all data. The primary outcome will be the proportion of physical education lesson time that students spend in MVPA. Secondary outcomes will include leisure-time physical activity, subjective well-being, and motivation towards physical activity.

Discussion

The provision of an online training platform for teachers could help facilitate more widespread dissemination of evidence-based interventions compared with programs that rely exclusively on face-to-face training.

Trial registration

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry-ACTRN12614000184​673. Registration date: February 19, 2014.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Hills AP, Dengel DR, Lubans DR. Supporting public health priorities: recommendations for physical education and physical activity promotion in schools. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2015;57(4):368–74.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Office for Standards in Education Children’s Services and Skills. Beyond 2012 – outstanding physical education for all: Physical education in schools. Manchester: Office for Standards in Education Children’s Services and Skills; 2013.
3.
Lonsdale C, Rosenkranz RR, Peralta LR, Bennie A, Fahey P, Lubans DR. A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in school physical education lessons. Prev Med. 2013;152–161.
4.
Fairclough S, Stratton G. Physical activity levels in middle and high school physical education: a review. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2005;17(3):217.
5.
Dishman RK, Hales DP, Pfeiffer KA, Felton G, Saunders R, Ward DS, et al. Physical self-concept and self-esteem mediate cross-sectional relations of physical activity and sport participation with depression symptoms among adolescent girls. Health Psychol. 2006;25(3):396–407.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Shoup JA, Gattshall M, Dandamudi P, Estabrooks P. Physical activity, quality of life, and weight status in overweight children. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(3):407–12.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Mahar MT, Murphy SK, Rowe DA, Golden J, Shields AT, Raedeke TD. Effects of a classroom-based program on physical activity and on-task behavior. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(12):2086.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Singh A, Uijtdewilligen L, Twisk JWR, van Mechelen W, Chinapaw MJM. Physical activity and performance at school: a systematic review of the literature including a methodological quality assessment. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(1):49–55.CrossRefPubMed
9.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy people 2010: understanding and improving health. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2000.
10.
McKenzie TL, Sallis JF, Prochaska JJ, Conway TL, Marshall SJ, Rosengard P. Evaluation of a two-year middle-school physical education intervention: M-SPAN. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004;36(8):1382–8.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Sallis JF, McKenzie TL, Alcaraz JE, Kolody B, Faucette N, Hovell MF. The effects of a 2-year physical education program (SPARK) on physical activity and fitness in elementary school students. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(8):1328–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Sallis JF. Age-related decline in physical activity: a synthesis of human and animal studies. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32:1598–600.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ntoumanis N, Barkoukis V, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C. Developmental trajectories of motivation in physical education: course, demographic differences, and antecedents. J Educ Psychol. 2009;101(3):717.CrossRef
14.
Perlman DJ. The influence of the social context on students’ in-class physical activity. J Teach Phys Educ. 2013;32(1):46–60.
15.
Owen KB, Smith J, Lubans DR, Ng JY, Lonsdale C. Self-determined motivation and physical activity in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2014;67:270–9.CrossRef
16.
Lonsdale C, Sabiston CM, Raedeke TD, Ha AS, Sum RK. Self-determined motivation and students’ physical activity during structured physical education lessons and free choice periods. Prev Med. 2009;48(1):69–73.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Jaakkola T, Liukkonen J, Laakso T, Ommundsen Y. The relationship between situational and contextual self-determined motivation and physical activity intensity as measured by heart rates during ninth grade students’ physical education classes. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2008;14(1):13.CrossRef
18.
Spray C. Motivational climate and perceived strategies to sustain pupils’ discipline in physical education. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2002;8(1):5–20.CrossRef
19.
Taylor IM, Lonsdale C. Cultural differences in the relationships among autonomy support, psychological need satisfaction, subjective vitality, and effort in British and Chinese physical education. J Sport Exe rc Psychol. 2010;32(5):655–73.
20.
Chatzisarantis NLD, Hagger MS. Effects of an intervention based on self-determination theory on self-reported leisure-time physical activity participation. Psychol Health. 2008;24(1):29–48.CrossRef
21.
Cheon SH, Reeve J, Moon IS. Experimentally based, longitudinally designed, teacher-focused intervention to help physical education teachers be more autonomy supportive toward their students. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2012;34:365–96.PubMed
22.
Lonsdale C, Rosenkranz RR, Sanders T, Peralta LR, Bennie A, Jackson B, et al. A cluster randomized controlled trial of strategies to increase adolescents’ physical activity and motivation in physical education: results of the motivating active learning in physical education (MALP) trial. Prev Med. 2013;57(5):696–702.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Hagger MS, Chatzisarantis N, Barkoukis V, Wang CKJ, Baranowski J. Perceived autonomy support in physical education and leisure-time physical activity: A cross-cultural evaluation of the trans-contextual model. J Educ Psychol. 2005;97(3):376–90.CrossRef
24.
Rzewnicki R, Auweele YV, De Bourdeaudhuij I. Addressing overreporting on the international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) telephone survey with a population sample. Public Health Nutr. 2003;6(3):299–306.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Chinapaw MJM, Mokkink LB, van Poppel MNM, van Mechelen W, Terwee CB. Physical activity questionnaires for youth: a systematic review of measurement properties. Sports Med. 2010;40:539–63.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In: Deci EL, Ryan RM, editors. Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester: The University of Rochester Press; 2002. p. 3–33.
27.
Reeve J, Jang H, Carrell D, Joen S, Barch J. Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motiv Emot. 2004;28(2):147–69.CrossRef
28.
Lonsdale C, Hodge K. Temporal ordering of motivational quality and athlete burnout in elite sport. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(5):913–21.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Edmunds J, Ntoumanis N, Duda JL. Testing a self-determination theory-based teaching style intervention in the exercise domain. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2008;38:375–88.CrossRef
30.
Ntoumanis N. A prospective study of participation in optional school physical education using a self-determination theory framework. J Educ Psychol. 2005;97(3):444–53.CrossRef
31.
Ntoumanis N. A self-determination approach to the understanding of motivation in physical education. Br J Educ Psychol. 2001;71(2):225–42.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Ntoumanis N, Standage M. Motivation in physical education classes: A self-determination theory perspective. J Res Theory Educ. 2009;7:194–202.CrossRef
33.
Aelterman N, Vansteenkiste M, Van Keer H, Van den Berghe L, De Meyer J, Haerens L. Students’ objectively measured physical activity levels and engagement as a function of between-class and between-student differences in motivation toward physical education. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2012;34(4):457.PubMed
34.
Su YL, Reeve J. A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intervention programs designed to support autonomy. Educ Psychol Rev. 2011;23(1):159–88.CrossRef
35.
Lubans DR, Smith JJ, Morgan PJ, Beauchamp MR, Miller A, Lonsdale C, Parker P, Dally K: Mediators of psychological well-being in adolescent boys. J Adolesc Health in press.
36.
Tessier D, Sarrazin P, Ntoumanis N. The effects of an experimental programme to support students autonomy on the overt behaviours of physical education teachers. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2008;23(3):239–53.CrossRef
37.
38.
Michie S, Johnston M, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles M. From theory to intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Appl Psychol. 2008;57(4):660–80.CrossRef
39.
Baranowski T, Anderson C, Carmack C. Mediating variable framework in physical activity interventions: How are we doing? How might we do better? Am J Prev Med. 1998;15(4):266–97.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Lubans DR, Foster C, Biddle SJH. A review of mediators of behavior in interventions to promote physical activity among children and adolescents. Prev Med. 2008;47(5):463–70.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new medical research council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337(7676):979–83.
42.
Allen JP, Pianta RC, Gregory A, Mikami AY, Lun J. An interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achievement. Science. 2011;333(6045):1034–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
44.
45.
Hardy LL, King L, Espinel P, Cosgrove C, Bauman A. NSW schools physical activity and nutrition survey (SPANS): full report. Sydney: NSW Ministry of Health; 2010.
46.
Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. Br Med J. 2004;328:702–8.CrossRef
47.
Siddiqui O. MMRM versus MI in dealing with missing data—a comparison based on 25 NDA data sets. J Biopharm Stat. 2011;21(3):423–36.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Twisk J, de Boer M, de Vente W, Heymans M. Multiple imputation of missing values was not necessary before performing a longitudinal mixed-model analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(9):1022–8.CrossRefPubMed
49.
McKenzie TL, Stone EJ, Feldman HA, Epping JN, Yang M, Strikmiller PK, et al. Effects of the CATCH physical education intervention: Teacher type and lesson location. Am J Prev Med. 2001;21(2):101–9.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Robusto KM, Trost SG. Comparison of three generations of ActiGraph™ activity monitors in children and adolescents. J Sports Sci. 2012;30(13):1429–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
51.
Evenson KR, Catellier DJ, Gill K, Ondrak KS, McMurray RG. Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children. J Sports Sci. 2008;26(14):1557–65.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Trost SG, Loprinzi PD, Moore R, Pfeiffer KA. Comparison of accelerometer cut points for predicting activity intensity in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(7):1360.CrossRefPubMed
53.
54.
Mattocks C, Ness A, Leary S, Tilling K, Blair SN, Shield J, et al. Use of accelerometers in a large field-based study of children: protocols, design issues, and effects on precision. J Phys Act Health. 2008;5.
55.
Matthews CE, Hagströmer M, Pober DM, Bowles HR. Best practices for using physical activity monitors in population-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012;44(1 Suppl 1):S68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Cain KL, Sallis JF, Conway TL, Van Dyck D, Calhoon L. Using accelerometers in youth physical activity studies: a review of methods. J Phys Act Health. 2013;10(3):437–50.PubMed
57.
Rangul V, Holmen TL, Kurtze N, Cuypers K, Midthjell K. Reliability and validity of two frequently used self-administered physical activity questionnaires in adolescents. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(1):47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
58.
Prochaska JJ, Sallis JF, Long B. A physical activity screening measure for use with adolescents in primary care. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155(5):554–9.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Morin AJ, Maïano C. Cross-validation of the short form of the physical self-inventory (PSI-S) using exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM). Psychol Sport Exercise. 2011;12(5):540–54.CrossRef
60.
Laurent J, Catanzaro SJ, Joiner Jr TE, Rudolph KD, Potter KI, Lambert S, et al. A measure of positive and negative affect for children: scale development and preliminary validation. Psychol Assess. 1999;11(3):326.CrossRef
61.
Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld P, Friedel J, Paris A. School engagement. In: Moore K, Lippman L, editors. What Do children need to flourish? volume 3. USA: Springer; 2005. p. 305–21.CrossRef
62.
Hyde CE. The relationship between teacher assessment practices, student goal orientation, and student engagement in elementary mathematics. Los Angeles: University of Southern California; 2009.
63.
Belmont M, Skinner E, Wellborn J, Connell J. Teacher as social context: a measure of student perceptions of teacher provision of involvement, structure, and autonomy support. Rochester: University of Rochester; 1988.
64.
Bartholomew K, Ntoumanis N, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C. The controlling interpersonal style in a coaching context: development and initial validation of a psychometric scale. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2010;32:193–21.PubMed
65.
Standage M, Duda JL, Ntoumanis N. A model of contextual motivation in physical education: using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. J Educ Psychol. 2003;95:97–110.CrossRef
66.
McAuley E, Duncan T, Tammen VV. Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1989;60:48–58.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Richer SF, Vallerand RJ. Construction et validation de l’échelle du sentiment d’appartenance sociale (ÉSAS) [Construction and validaton of the ÉSAS the relatedness feelings scale]. Euro Rev Applied Psychol. 1998;48(2):129–38.
68.
Goudas M, Biddle S, Fox K. Perceived locus of causality, goal orientations, and perceived competence in school physical education classes. Br J Educ Psychol. 1994;64:453–63.CrossRefPubMed
69.
Lonsdale C, Sabiston CM, Taylor IM, Ntoumanis N. Measuring student motivation for physical education: examining the psychometric properties of the perceived locus of causality questionnaire and the situational motivation scale. Psychol Sport Exercise. 2011;12(3):284–92.CrossRef
70.
Markland D, Tobin V. A modification to the behavioural regulation in exercise questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2004;26:191–6.
71.
72.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. Australian standard classification of languages. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2011.
73.
Currie C, Molcho M, Boyce W, Holstein B, Torsheim T, Richter M. Researching health inequalities in adolescents: the development of the health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) family affluence scale. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66(6):1429–36.CrossRefPubMed
74.
Flegal KM, Cole TJ. Construction of LMS parameters for the centers for disease control and prevention 2000 growth charts. Natl Health Stat Report. 2013;63:1–4.PubMed
75.
Krull JL, MacKinnon DP. Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivar Behav Res. 2001;36:249–77.CrossRef
76.
Assmann SF, Pocock SJ, Enos LE, Kasten LE. Subgroup analysis and other (mis) uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet. 2000;355(9209):1064–9.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
An Internet-supported Physical Activity Intervention Delivered in Secondary Schools Located in Low Socio-economic Status Communities: Study Protocol for the Activity and Motivation in Physical Education (AMPED) Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial 
Authors
Chris Lonsdale
Aidan Lester
Katherine B. Owen
Rhiannon L. White
Ian Moyes
Louisa Peralta
Morwenna Kirwan
Anthony Maeder
Andrew Bennie
Freya MacMillan
Gregory S. Kolt
Nikos Ntoumanis
Jennifer M. Gore
Ester Cerin
Thierno M.O. Diallo
Dylan P. Cliff
David R. Lubans
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2583-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Public Health 1/2016 Go to the issue

Research article

Cardiovascular risk outcome and program evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of a community-based, lay peer led program for people with diabetes

Study protocol

New Zealand’s new alcohol laws: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation

Research article

Impact of neighborhood resources on cardiovascular disease: a nationwide six-year follow-up

Research article

How has child growth around adiposity rebound altered in Scotland since 1990 and what are the risk factors for weight gain using the Growing Up in Scotland birth cohort 1?

Research article

Elevated blood pressure in adolescent girls: correlation to body size and composition

Research article

Exploring lifestyle and risk in preventing type 2 diabetes-a nested qualitative study of older participants in a lifestyle intervention program (VEND-RISK)