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 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Current influences and approaches to promote future physical activity in 11–13 year olds: a focus group study

Authors: Angela Carlin, Marie H. Murphy, Alison M. Gallagher

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Many children and adolescents are failing to meet current physical activity (PA) guidelines and consequently not achieving the benefits associated with regular participation in PA, with girls consistently less active than boys. In order to design interventions to increase physical activity in adolescents it is important to understand their perceptions of and preferences for physical activity.

Methods

One hundred eighty participants, mean (SD) age 12.1 (0.5) years, completed the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Children (PAQ-C) and had height and weight measured. This information was used to select a subsample of participants (n64; mean (SD) age 12.3 (0.4) years; 39 females; 25 males; 25 % overweight/obese) to take part in focus group discussions. Participants were grouped based on PAQ-C responses into ‘low-active’ and ‘highly-active’ groups, so that those with similar existing levels of PA were in the same focus group. A semi-structured discussion guide was employed to explore the key influences on current PA participation and to actively seek ideas on how best to promote future PA in this population. In total, nine focus groups (mixed-gender) were conducted within the school setting. All focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.

Results

A number of themes emerged in relation to influences on current PA including friendship and peers, family and other people, the consequences of not taking part in PA, changing priorities, and cost and access to resources. With regards to the future provision of PA, participants favoured opportunities to try new activities, increased provision of school-based activities which can be undertaken with friends and activities which incorporated the use of technology and encouragement through rewards and incentives. Gender differences were apparent in relation to the types of activities participants preferred taking part in. Differences were also observed between ‘low-active’ and ‘highly-active’ groups in relation to barriers to current participation in PA.

Conclusions

This study has highlighted a number of influences on current and future participation in PA, which differed based on gender and existing PA levels, for example, maximising the potential of the school day and including technology and incentives. These components can inform targeted interventions to increase PA in low active adolescents.
Footnotes
1
‘Camogie’ is an Irish stick and ball team sport played by females
 
2
‘Craic’ is an Irish word for fun/enjoyment
 
Literature
1.
Department of Health. Start active:stay active: a report on physical activity from the four home countries’ chief medical officers. Department of Health, London; 2011.
2.
Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008. Washington, DC: U.S: Department of Health and Human Services; 2008. p. 1–683.
3.
Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U. Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group. Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet. 2012;380(9838):247–57.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Breslin G, Gossrau-Breen D, McCay N, Gilmore G, McDonald L, Hanna D. Physical activity, gender, weight status, and wellbeing in 9- to 11-year-old children: a cross sectional survey. J Phys Act Health. 2012;9(3):394–401.CrossRefPubMed
5.
NICE. Promoting physical activity for children and young people (PH17). London, UK: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2009.
6.
Sirsch U. The impending transition from primary to secondary school: Challenge or threat? Int J Behav Dev. 2003;27(5):385–95.CrossRef
7.
Trost SG, Pate RR, Sallis JF, Freedson PS, Taylor WC, Dowda M, et al. Age and gender differences in objectively measured physical activity in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(2):350–5.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Sherar LB, Esliger DW, Baxter-Jones AD, Tremblay MS. Age and gender differences in youth physical activity: does physical maturity matter? Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(5):830–5.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Allender S, Cowburn G, Foster C. Understanding participation in sport and physical activity among children and adults: a review of qualitative studies. Health Educ Res. 2006;21(6):826–35.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Vu MB, Murrie D, Gonzalez V, Jobe JB. Listening to Girls and Boys Talk About Girls’ Physical Activity Behaviors. Health Educ Behav. 2006;33(1):81–96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Dwyer JJ, Allison KR, Goldenberg ER, Fein AJ, Yoshida KK, Boutilier MA. Adolescent girls' perceived barriers to participation in physical activity. Adolescence. 2006;41(161):75–89.PubMed
12.
Slater A, Tiggemann M. “Uncool to do sport”: A focus group study of adolescent girls’ reasons for withdrawing from physical activity. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2010;11(6):619–26.CrossRef
13.
Yungblut HE, Schinke RJ, McGannon KR. Views of Adolescent Female Youth on Physical Activity During Early Adolescence. J Sports Sci Med. 2012;11(1):39–50.PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Jago R, Brockman R, Fox KR, Cartwright K, Page SA, Thompson JL. Friendship groups and physical activity: qualitative findings on how physical activity is initiated and maintained among 10–11 year old children. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2009;6:4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Telama R. Tracking of physical activity from childhood to adulthood: a review. Obes Facts. 2009;2(3):187–95.CrossRefPubMed
16.
McKinley MC, Lowis C, Robson PJ, Wallace JM, Morrissey M, Moran A, et al. It's good to talk: children's views on food and nutrition. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59(4):542–51.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Brunton G, Harden A, Rees R, Kavanagh J, Oliver S, Oakley A. Children and physical activity: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London; 2003.
18.
Humbert ML, Chad KE, Bruner MW, Spink KS, Muhajarine N, Anderson KD, et al. Using a naturalistic ecological approach to examine the factors influencing youth physical activity across grades 7 to 12. Health Educ Behav. 2008;35(2):158–73.CrossRefPubMed
19.
20.
Whitehead S, Biddle S. Adolescent girls' perceptions of physical activity: A focus group study. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2008;14(2):243–62.CrossRef
21.
Kowalski KC, Crocker P, Donen R. The Physical Activity Questionnaire for Older Children (PAQ-C) and Adolescents (PAQ-A) Manual. Saskatoon, Canada: College of Kinesiology, University of Saskatchewan; 2004.
22.
23.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2008;3(2):77–101.CrossRef
24.
Cole TJ, Bellizzi MC, Flegal KM, Dietz WH. Establishing a standard definition for child overweight and obesity worldwide: international survey. BMJ. 2000;320:1240.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Fitzgerald A, Fitzgerald N, Aherne C. Do peers matter? A review of peer and/or friends' influence on physical activity among American adolescents. J Adolesc. 2012;35(4):941–58.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Coleman L, Cox L, Roker D. Girls and young women's participation in physical activity: psychological and social influences. Health Educ Res. 2008;23(4):633–47.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Flintoff A, Scraton S. Stepping into active leisure? Young women's perceptions of active lifestyles and their experiences of school physical education. Sport Educ Soc. 2001;66:5–21.CrossRef
28.
Sallis JF, Prochaska JJ, Taylor WC. A review of correlates of physical activity of children and adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(5):963–75.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Van Der Horst K, Paw MJ, Twisk JW, Van Mechelen W. A brief review on correlates of physical activity and sedentariness in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(8):1241–50.CrossRef
30.
Butt J, Weinberg RS, Breckon JD, Claytor RP. Adolescent physical activity participation and motivational determinants across gender, age, and race. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(8):1074–83.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Fairclough S, Stratton G. 'Physical education makes you fit and healthy'. Physical education's contribution to young people's physical activity levels. Health Educ Res. 2005;20(1):14–23.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Meyer U, Roth R, Zahner L, Gerber M, Puder JJ, Hebestreit H, et al. Contribution of physical education to overall physical activity. Scand J Med Sci Spor. 2013;23(5):600–6.
33.
Global Advocacy for Physical Activity (GAPA) the Advocacy Council of the International Society for Physical Activity and Health (ISPAH). NCD prevention: investments [corrected] that work for physical activity. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46(10):709–12.CrossRef
34.
Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, LaRocca RL. School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;doi:10.​1002/​14651858. CD007651.pub2.
35.
Cale L. Physical Activity Promotion in Secondary Schools. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2000;1(6):71–90.CrossRef
36.
Edwards MB, Kanters MA, Bocarro JN. Opportunities for extracurricular physical activity in North Carolina middle schools. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(5):597–605.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Ridgers ND, Stratton G, Fairclough SJ. Physical activity levels of children during school playtime. Sports Med. 2006;36(4):359–71.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Parrish AM, Okely AD, Stanley RM, Ridgers ND. The effect of school recess interventions on physical activity: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2013;43(4):287–99.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Ridgers ND, Salmon J, Parrish AM, Stanley RM, Okely AD. Physical activity during school recess: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(3):320–8.CrossRefPubMed
40.
41.
Watson A, Eliott J, Mehta K. Perceived barriers and facilitators to participation in physical activity during the school lunch break for girls aged 12–13 years. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2015;21(2):257–71.CrossRef
42.
Ogilvie D, Foster CE, Rothnie H, Cavill N, Hamilton V, Fitzsimons CF, et al. Interventions to promote walking: systematic review. BMJ. 2007;334(7605):1204.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Kirby J, Inchley J. Walking behaviours among adolescent girls in Scotland: a pilot study. Health Education. 2012;113(1):28–51.CrossRef
44.
Wilson DK, Williams J, Evans A, Mixon G, Rheaume C. Brief report: a qualitative study of gender preferences and motivational factors for physical activity in underserved adolescents. J Pediatr Psychol. 2005;30(3):293–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
Lau PW, Lau EY, del Wong P, Ransdell L. A systematic review of information and communication technology-based interventions for promoting physical activity behavior change in children and adolescents. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(3), e48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
The Office of Communication. Children and Parents: Media use and attitudes report. London: The Stationery Office; 2014.
47.
Epstein LH, Saelens BE, O’Brien JG. Effects of reinforcing increases in active behaviour versus decreases in sedentary behaviour for obese children. Int J Behav Med. 1995;2(1):41–50.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Hardman CA, Horne PJ, Fergus LC. Effects of rewards, peer-modelling and pedometer targets on children's physical activity: a school-based intervention study. Psychol Health. 2011;26(1):3–21.CrossRefPubMed
49.
50.
51.
McEvoy CT, Lawton J, Kee F, Young IS, Woodside JV, McBratney J, et al. Adolescents' views about a proposed rewards intervention to promote healthy food choice in secondary school canteens. Health Educ Res. 2014;29(5):799–811.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Griffiths LJ, Cortina-Borja M, Sera F, Pouliou T, Geraci M, Rich C, et al. How active are our children? Findings from the Millennium Cohort Study. BMJ Open. 2013. doi:10.​1136/​bmjopen-2013-002893.
53.
Kowalski KC, Crocker PRE, Faulkner RA. Validation of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Older Children. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 1997;9:174–86.CrossRef
54.
Walker H, Scarlett M, Williams B. Health survey for Northern Ireland: first results from the 2013/14 survey. Belfast: Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety; 2014.
55.
Peterson-Sweeney K. The use of focus groups in pediatric and adolescent research. J Pediatr Health Care. 2005;19(2):104–10.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Trost SG. State of the art reviews: Measurement of physical activity in children and adolescents. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2007;1(4):299–314.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Current influences and approaches to promote future physical activity in 11–13 year olds: a focus group study
Authors
Angela Carlin
Marie H. Murphy
Alison M. Gallagher
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2601-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Public Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

The aetiology of community associated pneumonia in children in Nanjing, China and aetiological patterns associated with age and season

Research article

Community as a source of health in three racial/ethnic communities in Oregon: a qualitative study

Research article

Noise exposure and hypertension: investigation of a silent relationship

Research article

Demographic and socio-economic factors associated with multiple health risk behaviours among adolescents in Serbia: a cross sectional study

Research article

The influence of aerobic fitness on obesity and its parent-offspring correlations in a cross-sectional study among German families

Study protocol

The LIFE-Adult-Study: objectives and design of a population-based cohort study with 10,000 deeply phenotyped adults in Germany