Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol

Caera Grady; Kwok Ng; Elaine Murtagh; Catherine Woods

doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1

Home Browse Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Study Protocol

Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Caera Grady ¹, Kwok Ng^1-3, Elaine Murtagh¹, Catherine Woods¹

PUBLISHED 25 Aug 2022

Author details Author details

¹ The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, Co. Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland
² School of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Eastern Finland, Joensuu, Kuopio, FI-70029, Finland
³ Faculty of Education, University of Turku, Rauma, Finland, FI-26100, Finland

Caera Grady
Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Kwok Ng
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Elaine Murtagh
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Catherine Woods
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: Worldwide, adolescents are not meeting the minimum recommended physical activity (PA) guidelines to achieve health benefits. Awareness of the guidelines among adolescents is low, only 3.6% can report them correctly. The school is an ideal PA promotion setting, no other institute has the same reach or influence on the adolescent population. There is a need for an effective communication strategy for PA messages for adolescents. The purpose of this review is to explore how, when, who, where and what i.e. the content, context and mode of delivery of PA messages to communicate with adolescents to improve their awareness and understanding of PA that will potentially lead to an increase in PA levels. Methods: A scoping review was selected as the most appropriate methodology due to the broad nature of the research question. The PCC mnemonic (Population, concept, context), recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute, was used to develop the search strategy and research question. This review will follow the scoping review framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) which was later updated by Levac et al (2010) to ensure the methods are systematic. It will also follow the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews checklist. Sources include databases (CINAHL, Education Source, Scopus, PubMED), grey literature from the World Health Organisation, Global Index Medicus and the reference lists of extracted articles will be checked from the year 1995 onwards. Results: A PRISMA flow diagram will demonstrate the final articles included and results will be presented and summarised as recurring themes. The results will be discussed in relation to existing literature and future implications for research, policy and practice. Conclusion: This will be the first review to explore the PA messaging context among adolescents and the findings will help inform a strategy for communicating PA to adolescents.

Keywords

Effective communication, Physical Activity Messaging, youth, post-primary

Corresponding author: Caera Grady

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2022 Grady C et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Grady C, Ng K, Murtagh E and Woods C. Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:59 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1) First published: 25 Aug 2022, 5:59 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1) Latest published: 25 Aug 2022, 5:59 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1)

Introduction

The health benefits of engaging in regular physical activity (PA) are widely documented¹. However, over 80% of adolescents (11–17yrs) worldwide do not meet the PA guidelines to achieve these health benefits². The complex physical inactivity challenge has no single solution. The Global Action Plan for Physical Activity recommends a systems approach and multi-level stakeholder support through community wide interventions and national strategies to tackle the problem (low levels of PA) which involves creating connections, interactions and feedback between system architects^3,4. Adolescence is an important life stage where PA patterns track into adulthood, researchers have called for an effective communication strategy for disseminating the message to ensure that young people are aware of and understand the PA recommendations^5–7. A research study conducted in Portugal during the 2011–2012 academic year showed that less than 4% of adolescents were able to correctly identify the PA guidelines for children and adolescents with no statistically significant differences between gender or socio-economic status⁶.

The school is an ideal setting for PA promotion albeit a unique, complex and adaptive sub-system thus, a systems approach is essential to increase population levels of PA among children and adolescents^8,9. There are a wide range of professionals outside of the health sector with a potential role in promoting PA to adolescents, such as teachers within the school setting¹⁰. A large proportion of children and adolescents’ waking day revolves around school; no other institution has the same reach or influence over this population⁵. The International Society for Physical Activity and Health recommends whole-of-school programmes as one of the eight best investments for PA promotion among children and adolescents, this is a multi-component approach that aims to promote PA to all members of the school community¹¹. This can include physical education programs, active classrooms, after school PA opportunities, activities during break times and promoting active travel¹¹. Some examples of whole-of-school programmes include the Active School Flag (Ireland), Finnish Schools on the Move (Finland), Sigue la Huella (Spain) and the Comprehensive Schools Physical Activity Promotion (USA) working towards this approach^12–15. Finally, curriculum subjects such as physical education and wellbeing are important opportunities for the promotion of PA to adolescents within the school setting. In order to support the promotion of PA in schools the needs within the school setting must be understood. One such solution is to identify acceptable and effective communication methods and tools that align with the strategic priorities and routine work within the school¹⁰.

PA messaging has been described as ‘the overall process of creating and delivering PA messages’ and has potential to improve population PA levels¹⁶. Previous reviews have provided recommendations for improving the communication of PA messages to the general public, underserved communities, parents and children with disabilities^10,16–21. Some approaches used when communicating messages in the aforementioned studies include formative research, social marketing principals, message tailoring and message framing.

i. Formative research is the act of gathering data that can be used for the development and implementation of programmes²². It can help determine the appropriate message content, context and delivery methods suitable for the target population¹⁶.
ii. Social marketing uses commercial marketing ideas and strategies to promote voluntary behavioural change; it involves the exchange of a product (i.e. PA) for a cost (i.e. time or energy) in a manner that is attractive to an individual^23,24. It uses affective and emotional responses to make a product more appealing¹⁶. The VERB campaign is an example where this approach was successful in promoting PA as enjoyable and fun to adolescents²⁵. After four years of the campaign 75% or more tweens (9–13yrs) were aware of and understood the VERB messages and in the final year, 28% had unprompted recall of VERB²⁶.
iii. Message tailoring or targeting presents information that is suitable to the individual characteristics of the message recipient¹⁸. Tailoring messages has been proven to increase message salience and the impact of the message on the behaviour change^27,28. Although message tailoring should be considered a promising practice with potential to enhance the effectiveness of messages accompanying the PA guidelines, it is not essential¹⁸.
iv. PA message framing, originating from Prospect Theory, suggests that individuals will respond differently to factually equivalent messages depending on whether they are worded to highlight benefits or consequences^16,18,29. Gain framing is generally preferred over loss-framing messages when promoting PA potentially due to its inclusion of information targeting the psychological determinants of PA¹⁸.

Each of these approaches contribute to understanding the needs within the target group, the development and delivery of acceptable and effective communication methods and tools to support PA promotion. There is a need to explore the literature to determine which methods are suitable to ensure effective communication with adolescents in order to increase PA knowledge, awareness, attitudes and levels.

Rationale for this scoping review

A scoping review addresses broader topics where many different study designs might be applicable and is unlikely to address specific research questions nor assess the quality of included studies³⁰. In contrast, a systematic review would typically focus on a well-defined question, can identify study designs, with the aim to provide answers to the questions from a narrow range of quality assessed studies. Due to the broad nature of the research topic, a scoping review was identified as the most appropriate methodological approach. It will allow us to explore the breadth or depth of the literature, map and summarise the evidence, inform future research and identify and address knowledge gaps³¹.

Preliminary searches were conducted by the primary author, on communicating PA messages to adolescents across various databases like CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed. The searches revealed no reviews conducted that focused solely on PA messages for the adolescent population in general. Reviews that targeted PA messaging with other population groups meeting our eligibility criteria e.g. children with physical disabilities, were identified and will be included in the review^16,21. Little evidence identifying the most effective methods of communicating PA messages to adolescents i.e. content, context and mode of delivery was found. Thus, this review will help determine the extent of the literature among adolescents and clarify the key concepts of communicating messages to adolescents.

Scoping review aims

This research aims to explore existing messaging techniques or strategies in PA promotion interventions for adolescents, their implementation and effectiveness in leading to a positive PA behaviour change.

Objectives

The specific objectives are to:

1. Identify and map the literature on how messages have previously been communicated to adolescents in relation to PA
2. Clarify the methods and approaches used in previous studies that involved communicating messages to adolescents.
3. Discuss the evaluation of the outcomes measured in the articles identified within the scoping review.

Methods

Protocol

This scoping review will follow the guidelines and stages set out by Levac, Colquhoun³² who built upon the methodological framework set out by Arksey and O'Malley³⁰. This updated framework has six essential stages: i) identifying the research question, ii) identifying relevant studies, iii) study selection, iv) charting the data, v) collating, summarising and reporting results and vi) consultation with knowledge users. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis have developed an extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) 22-item checklist will also be utilised in this study³¹.

Step 1: Identifying the research question

The “PCC” mnemonic (population, concept and context) was used to develop a clear title and research question³³. In order to capture the most appropriate body of literature we iteratively searched the literature and revised search terms which resulted with the main concept of communicating messages and principal contextual settings for which the concept will be explored: PA promotion programmes or interventions and the target population as adolescents. Finally, our outcome of interest is to determine what, who, when, where and how PA messages should be communicated to adolescents.

The following research questions were identified:

1. What (content), how (mode of delivery/communication) and who/when/where (context) to deliver PA messages to adolescents?

2. What methodologies are used to determine the effectiveness of the messages for adolescents? (i.e. an instrument)

3. Should a mass media or multi-media communication campaign be included in whole-school PA programmes? (i.e. are they effective?)

Step 2: Identifying relevant studies

For comprehensiveness and rigor several databases: Scopus, EBSCO (CINAHL, Education source), PubMED will be searched. We will also include grey literature such as conference abstracts, theses and reports from the World Health Organisation Global Index Medicus. Table 1 in the Extended data gives an overview of the predetermined eligibility criteria i.e., inclusion/exclusion criteria.

Step 3: Study selection

Using an iterative process we identified and agreed upon a search strategy as a team in collaboration with the faculty librarian in the School of Education and Health Sciences at the University of Limerick (Extended data, Appendix 1)³². Firstly, a preliminary search of the literature was conducted on CINAHL searching article titles, abstracts and full texts to guide the development of our second search strategy. Second, we are including the identified keywords and subject headings in the search strategy across all databases being used. Finally, will look at the reference lists from articles selected for the review i.e. snowballing. The librarian provided suggestions and verifications regarding the appropriate syntax and the adaption of search strategies across databases.

Once the searches have been ran in all databases, the search results will be downloaded to EndNote where duplicates will be removed and then uploaded to Rayyan review software where if necessary further duplicates will be removed³⁴. The title/abstract screening process will be piloted by double screening 10% of retrieved articles (10% by CG and 10% by either KN or EM) and inter-rater reliability calculated for title and abstract screening using kappa statistic. Screening will begin once an agreement rate of 75% or greater by CG and either EM/KN as per pre-determined eligibility criteria. If it is unclear whether or not to include an article based on the first stage of the reviewing process, the study will be included for full-text review to ensure it is not being excluded without full consideration. The same process will be repeated when screening full text articles with reviewers from the research team. The reviewers will meet at multiple stages throughout the reviewing process to discuss any discrepancies that may have emerged. Any discrepancies will be discussed until a consensus is achieved, arbitrated as necessary by a third reviewer.

Step 4: Preliminary charting elements and associated question

An Excel table (see Extended data, Table 2) will be used to extract and chart the data systematically. The rows will represent the different articles and the columns will provide key details addressed in the article such as, the context, content, mode of delivery, method of measurement, implementation and effectiveness of PA messages. This information is important to note for the next stage of the review process. The piloting process will take place with two or more researchers charting the data independently from the first 5–10 studies and meet to determine whether their approach to data extraction is consistent with the research question and purpose. This stage is an iterative process as new data are presented in the examination stages, leading to continual charting updates.

Step 5: Collating summarising and reporting the results

This stage has three clear steps:

i) Collating and summarising the results

Following data extraction and charting we will provide a narrative synthesis of the included studies, descriptively summarising the data that has been charted. We will not critically appraise the data; we will look to aggregate the findings of the included studies allowing us to summarise and identify recurring themes. These themes will be reported qualitatively and displayed in a way which answers the proposed research question and objectives.

ii) Reporting the results

Results will be reported using the PRISMA-ScR guidelines and a PRISMA flow diagram will be included to show all studies selected or excluded at each stage³⁵. Findings will be organised into categories such as aims, methodological design, key findings and gaps in the literature but also by categories that specifically highlight theoretical and operational linkages such as context, conceptual and operational features and measurements used.

iii) Research implications for future research, practice and policy

By understanding how PA messages are delivered in what context and by whom will help inform the development of a PA messaging framework for adolescents. The broader implications of the findings for policy, practice and research will be highlighted.

Step 6: Consultation with knowledge users

Levac et al. suggested this stage should be essential, after Arksey and O’Malley deemed it as optional, as it adds to the methodological rigour of a study^30,32. Since this review is a part of a study on effective PA communication for adolescents, we will utilise an existing partnership between researchers, knowledge users and post-primary schools. This collaboration initially began in 2018 where formative participatory research took place with the University of Limerick researchers, and the students, teachers, parents and sports coaches in Irish post-primary schools.

The format for consulting with stakeholders will follow a participatory approach in the style of a workshop with focus group discussions. It will include opportunities for learning and action using tools for presenting the results of the scoping review and discussion between stakeholders about any potential modifications regarding how the literature defines, measures and operationalises effective communication with adolescents. The purpose of this consultation is to share preliminary findings with stakeholders, validate the findings i.e. ensure they have practical relevance and to inform a draft effective PA communication for adolescent’s toolkit. A further series of consultation phases will take place with additional stakeholders as part of a follow-up study i.e. a modified delphi study.

Discussion

The school is an ideal PA promoting setting, whole-of-school programmes and Physical Education curricula play a large role in the way PA is communicated to adolescents^11,36. Previous literature highlights the importance and greater effectiveness of portraying PA as fun and enjoyable to children and adolescents rather than stating the health-related benefits of PA¹⁶. This review aims to map and synthesis the available literature in relation to the specific content of PA messages that is deemed acceptable by adolescents, the delivery of the message i.e. the most appropriate personnel and the method in which it is communicated e.g. multi-media campaign and the environment in which the messages are communicated e.g. whole school PA programmes. The findings from this review will guide the direction of future research with adolescents to identify an effective communication strategy for PA.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval was not required or obtained for this scoping review. The scoping review findings will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and the findings will be presented at appropriate academic conferences and to project partners to inform the design of the effective PA communication for adolescent’s toolkit. As highlighted above in Step 6: Consultation with knowledge users we will share the findings with an array of stakeholders who will have the opportunity to discuss potential modifications for action.

Data availability

Underlying data

No data are associated with this article.

Extended data

Open Science Framework: Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BCNS6³⁵

Extended data (available on the OSF registration):

Table 1. eligibility criteria (pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria)
Table 2. Data charting elements (variables to be extracted from the included studies)
Appendix 1. Scopus search strategy (complete search strategy in Scopus database)
Appendix 2. PRISMA-P 2015 checklist

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the faculty librarian from the Education and Health Sciences Liz Dore for providing guidance in relation to refining the search strategy and adapting to various databases for this scoping review. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. Enrique García Bengoechea for his feedback on the overall concept of the topic and as part of the wider supervisory team. Finally, the authors would also like to acknowledge the Post-primary Active School Flag programme, a Department of Education initiative funded by Healthy Ireland for the ongoing support and collaboration. Findings from the Post-primary Active School Flag feasibility study contributed to the conceptualisation of this study.

Faculty Opinions recommended

References

1. Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, et al.: World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24): 1451–62. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
2. Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, et al.: Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1· 6 million participants. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; 4(1): 23–35. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
3. World Health Organisation: Global action plan on physical activity (GAPPA) 2018–2030: more active people for a healthier world. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Reference Source
4. Murphy JJ, Barry N, Bauman A, et al.: Getting Ireland Active'- Application of a systems approach to increasing physical activity in Ireland using the GAPPA framework. J Phys Act Health. 2021; 18(11): 1427–1436. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
5. Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, et al.: School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 2013(2): CD007651. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
6. Marques A, Martins J, Sarmento H, et al.: Do students know the physical activity recommendations for health promotion? J Phys Act Health. 2015; 12(2): 253–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
7. Hayes G, Dowd KP, MacDonncha C, et al.: Tracking of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior From Adolescence to Young Adulthood: A Systematic Literature Review. J Adolesc Health. 2019; 65(4): 446–54. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
8. Daly-Smith A, Quarmby T, Archbold VSJ, et al.: Using a multi-stakeholder experience-based design process to co-develop the Creating Active Schools Framework. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1): 13. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
9. van Sluijs EMF, Ekelund U, Crochemore-Silva I, et al.: Physical activity behaviours in adolescence: current evidence and opportunities for intervention. Lancet. 2021; 398(10298): 429–42. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
10. Milton K, Bauman AE, Faulkner G, et al.: Maximising the impact of global and national physical activity guidelines: the critical role of communication strategies. Bri J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24): 1463. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
11. Milton K, Cavill N, Chalkley A, et al.: Eight Investments That Work for Physical Activity. J Phys Act Health. 2021; 18(6): 625–30. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
12. Ng KW, McHale F, Cotter K, et al.: Feasibility Study of the Secondary Level Active School Flag Programme: Study Protocol. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2019; 4(1): 16. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
13. Pardo BM, Clemente JAJ, González LG, et al.: Development of the 'Sigue la Huella' physical activity intervention for adolescents in Huesca, Spain. Health Promot Int. 2019; 34(3): 519–531. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
14. Haapala HL, Hirvensalo MH, Kulmala J, et al.: Changes in physical activity and sedentary time in the Finnish Schools on the Move program: a quasi-experimental study. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017; 27(11): 1442–53. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
15. America SoHaPES: Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP): Centre of Disease Control (CDC) & SHAPE America. Reference Source
16. Williamson C, Baker G, Mutrie N, et al.: Get the message? A scoping review of physical activity messaging. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1): 51. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
17. Nobles J, Thomas C, Banks Gross Z, et al.: "Let's Talk about Physical Activity": Understanding the Preferences of Under-Served Communities when Messaging Physical Activity Guidelines to the Public. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(8): 2782. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
18. Latimer AE, Brawley LR, Bassett RL: A systematic review of three approaches for constructing physical activity messages: What messages work and what improvements are needed? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010; 7: 36. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
19. Latimer-Cheung AE, Rhodes RE, Kho ME, et al.: Evidence-informed recommendations for constructing and disseminating messages supplementing the new Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines. BMC Public Health. 2013; 13: 419. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
20. Bergeron CD, Tanner AH, Friedman D, et al.: Physical Activity Communication: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Health Promot Pract. 2019; 20(3): 344–353. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
21. Larocca V, Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, Latimer-Cheung A, et al.: Physical Activity Messages for Youth with Disabilities: An Evaluation of Attitudes, Intentions, and Preferences. Health Commun. 2020; 35(8): 974–983. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
22. Gittelsohn J, Steckler A, Johnson CC, et al.: Formative research in school and community-based health programs and studies: "state of the art" and the TAAG approach. Health Educ Behav. 2006; 33(1): 25–39. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
23. Andreasen AR: Social Marketing: Its Definition and Domain. J Pub Pol Market. 1994; 13(1): 108–114. Publisher Full Text
24. Brawley LR, Latimer AE: Physical activity guides for Canadians: messaging strategies, realistic expectations for change, and evaluation. Can J Public Health. 2007; 98 Suppl 2: S170–84. PubMed Abstract
25. Huhman M, Kelly RP, Edgar T: Social Marketing as a Framework for Youth Physical Activity Initiatives: a 10-Year Retrospective on the Legacy of CDC's VERB Campaign. Curr Obes Rep. 2017; 6(2): 101–107. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
26. Huhman ME, Potter LD, Duke JC, et al.: Evaluation of a National Physical Activity Intervention for Children: VERB™ Campaign, 2002–2004. Am J Preven Med. 2007; 32(1): 38–43. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
27. Kreuter MW, Wray RJ: Tailored and targeted health communication: strategies for enhancing information relevance. Am J Health Behav. 2003; 27 Suppl 3: S227–32. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
28. Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS: Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007; 133(4): 673–93. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
29. Tversky A, Kahneman D: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981; 211(4481): 453–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
30. Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Int J Society Res Meth: Theory Pract. 2005; 8(1): 19–32. Publisher Full Text
31. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al.: PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169(7): 467–73. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
32. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK: Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010; 5: 69. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
33. Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al.: Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020; 18(10): 2119–2126. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
34. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, et al.: Rayyan — a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5(1): 210. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
35. Grady CL, Ng K, Murtagh E, et al.: Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What Works? A Scoping Review Protocol. OSF. [Data]. 2022. http://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BCNS6
36. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): School health guidelines to promote healthy eating and physical activity. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2011; 60(RR–5): 1–76. PubMed Abstract

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 25 Aug 2022

Author details Author details

Caera Grady
Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Kwok Ng
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Elaine Murtagh
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Catherine Woods
Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (1)

version 1

Published: 25 Aug 2022, 5:59

https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1

© 2022 Grady C et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

VIEWS

258

downloads

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Grady C, Ng K, Murtagh E and Woods C. Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol [version 1; peer review: 2 approved] HRB Open Res 2022, 5:59 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13594.1)

NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 25 Aug 2022

Views

Reviewer Report 17 Nov 2022

Leanne C. Doherty, The Centre for Exercise Medicine, Physical Activity and Health, Sport and Exercise Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK

Approved

https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14851.r33093

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes. The authors adequately outlined the problem of physical inactivity in this cohort of adolescents and the need to identify effective techniques to communicate with them, to promote physical activity, and in turn impact behavior. This research is very relevant given the rate of obesity and physical inactivity globally.

Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes. The authors clearly explained the difference between a scoping review and a systematic review and clearly justified their choice of undertaking a scoping review.

Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes. The authors clearly outline how they will adhere to the methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews. I was easily able to access the supplementary files regarding eligibility criteria, data charting elements, and Scopus search strategy. I think the reporting plan is very appropriate and given the data will be organised by categories and linked to the review objectives, the results will be well-structured and easy to follow. This will aid the reader when relating the findings to the stated objectives.

Additional comments

I have one comment regarding the inclusion criteria. Your population/sample will include adolescents in post-primary schools, yet the review is not limited to the school setting. Would it, therefore, be more beneficial to replace "in post-primary schools" with the appropriate age range? Some adolescents leave the post-primary setting at 15/16 years of age to move into other Further Education facilities.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Human Nutrition, Physical activity and Health research.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 17 Nov 2023

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

17 Nov 2023

Author Response

The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and ... Continue reading The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and this was an lengthy debate during the early stages of this review. While we did not want to limit our results retrieved from databases by defining an age range, after reviewing the initial results retrieved we recognised the need to refine our inclusion/exclusion criteria and define an age range. The inclusion criteria will be updated in our review paper.
The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and this was an lengthy debate during the early stages of this review. While we did not want to limit our results retrieved from databases by defining an age range, after reviewing the initial results retrieved we recognised the need to refine our inclusion/exclusion criteria and define an age range. The inclusion criteria will be updated in our review paper.
Competing Interests: No competing interests to declare. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 17 Nov 2023

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

17 Nov 2023

Author Response

The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and ... Continue reading The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and this was an lengthy debate during the early stages of this review. While we did not want to limit our results retrieved from databases by defining an age range, after reviewing the initial results retrieved we recognised the need to refine our inclusion/exclusion criteria and define an age range. The inclusion criteria will be updated in our review paper.
The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and this was an lengthy debate during the early stages of this review. While we did not want to limit our results retrieved from databases by defining an age range, after reviewing the initial results retrieved we recognised the need to refine our inclusion/exclusion criteria and define an age range. The inclusion criteria will be updated in our review paper.
Competing Interests: No competing interests to declare. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 26 Aug 2022

Matthew Mclaughlin, Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, Callaghan, NSW, Australia

Approved

https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14851.r32742

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?
Yes, the study outlines the need for a review in this population of messaging/communicating physical activity. I particularly enjoyed the succinct writing style, kudos to the authors for packing a lot of information into such a short paper.

Is the study design appropriate for the research question?
Yes, a sufficient rationale for a scoping review is provided (e.g. compared with a systematic review).

Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?
Yes, the tables will be particularly useful for replication purposes. Although the clear use of scoping review methodologies and checklists is also to be commended.

Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?
Yes, this is a protocol.

Major comments
Overall this is an excellent protocol and I am confident it will be a useful contribution to the literature. I only have one question/idea/suggestion, which may have been considered already, but I'd be keen to see the authors thoughts: Can the authors provide more detail on the grey literature they plan to search and what strategy they will follow? I ask because the description in Table 1 implies that government reports, websites, books etc. will not be searched. I imagined there would be some publicly available reports from government and NGO's that may have conducted campaigns? Anyway, just a thought! Not a dealbreaker for this protocol. Just a possible way to boost the number of included articles.

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Physical activity, young people, reviews, interventions, scale-up.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 08 Dec 2022

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

08 Dec 2022

Author Response

The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the ... Continue reading The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the grey literature search strategy and have taken this into consideration. Please note that we did not exclude government reports however, for feasibility and capacity reasons, we decided to only search databases that index grey literature as opposed to conducting an extensive search of the grey literature.
The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the grey literature search strategy and have taken this into consideration. Please note that we did not exclude government reports however, for feasibility and capacity reasons, we decided to only search databases that index grey literature as opposed to conducting an extensive search of the grey literature.
Competing Interests: There are no competing interests to disclose. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 08 Dec 2022

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

08 Dec 2022

Author Response

The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the ... Continue reading The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the grey literature search strategy and have taken this into consideration. Please note that we did not exclude government reports however, for feasibility and capacity reasons, we decided to only search databases that index grey literature as opposed to conducting an extensive search of the grey literature.
The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the grey literature search strategy and have taken this into consideration. Please note that we did not exclude government reports however, for feasibility and capacity reasons, we decided to only search databases that index grey literature as opposed to conducting an extensive search of the grey literature.
Competing Interests: There are no competing interests to disclose. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 25 Aug 2022

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 1 25 Aug 22	read	read

Matthew Mclaughlin, The University of Western Australia, Callaghan, Australia
Leanne C. Doherty, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

13 Views

17 Nov 2022 | for Version 1

Leanne C. Doherty, The Centre for Exercise Medicine, Physical Activity and Health, Sport and Exercise Sciences Research Institute, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK

13 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Not applicable

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Human Nutrition, Physical activity and Health research.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

17 Nov 2023

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

The authors express their gratitude to Dr Leanne Doherty for the positive feedback and for the time dedicated to reviewing our paper. We acknowledge your point about the population and this was an lengthy debate during the early stages of this review. While we did not want to limit our results retrieved from databases by defining an age range, after reviewing the initial results retrieved we recognised the need to refine our inclusion/exclusion criteria and define an age range. The inclusion criteria will be updated in our review paper.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests to declare.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

13 Views

26 Aug 2022 | for Version 1

Matthew Mclaughlin, Telethon Kids Institute, The University of Western Australia, Callaghan, NSW, Australia

13 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved

Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate for the research question?

Yes
Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Physical activity, young people, reviews, interventions, scale-up.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

08 Dec 2022

Caera Grady, The Physical Activity for Health Research Cluster, Health Research Institute, Physical Education and Sports Sciences Department, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland

The authors would like to thank Dr Matthew McLaughlin for taking the time to review this manuscript and for providing positive and constructive feedback. We acknowledge the point about the grey literature search strategy and have taken this into consideration. Please note that we did not exclude government reports however, for feasibility and capacity reasons, we decided to only search databases that index grey literature as opposed to conducting an extensive search of the grey literature.

View more View less

Competing Interests

There are no competing interests to disclose.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, et al.: World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24): 1451–62. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[2] 2. Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, et al.: Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1· 6 million participants. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; 4(1): 23–35. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[3] 3. World Health Organisation: Global action plan on physical activity (GAPPA) 2018–2030: more active people for a healthier world. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Reference Source

[4] 4. Murphy JJ, Barry N, Bauman A, et al.: Getting Ireland Active'- Application of a systems approach to increasing physical activity in Ireland using the GAPPA framework. J Phys Act Health. 2021; 18(11): 1427–1436. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Dobbins M, Husson H, DeCorby K, et al.: School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 2013(2): CD007651. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[6] 6. Marques A, Martins J, Sarmento H, et al.: Do students know the physical activity recommendations for health promotion? J Phys Act Health. 2015; 12(2): 253–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. Hayes G, Dowd KP, MacDonncha C, et al.: Tracking of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior From Adolescence to Young Adulthood: A Systematic Literature Review. J Adolesc Health. 2019; 65(4): 446–54. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Daly-Smith A, Quarmby T, Archbold VSJ, et al.: Using a multi-stakeholder experience-based design process to co-develop the Creating Active Schools Framework. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1): 13. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[9] 9. van Sluijs EMF, Ekelund U, Crochemore-Silva I, et al.: Physical activity behaviours in adolescence: current evidence and opportunities for intervention. Lancet. 2021; 398(10298): 429–42. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[10] 10. Milton K, Bauman AE, Faulkner G, et al.: Maximising the impact of global and national physical activity guidelines: the critical role of communication strategies. Bri J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24): 1463. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[11] 11. Milton K, Cavill N, Chalkley A, et al.: Eight Investments That Work for Physical Activity. J Phys Act Health. 2021; 18(6): 625–30. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Ng KW, McHale F, Cotter K, et al.: Feasibility Study of the Secondary Level Active School Flag Programme: Study Protocol. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2019; 4(1): 16. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[13] 13. Pardo BM, Clemente JAJ, González LG, et al.: Development of the 'Sigue la Huella' physical activity intervention for adolescents in Huesca, Spain. Health Promot Int. 2019; 34(3): 519–531. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Haapala HL, Hirvensalo MH, Kulmala J, et al.: Changes in physical activity and sedentary time in the Finnish Schools on the Move program: a quasi-experimental study. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017; 27(11): 1442–53. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. America SoHaPES: Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP): Centre of Disease Control (CDC) & SHAPE America. Reference Source

[16] 16. Williamson C, Baker G, Mutrie N, et al.: Get the message? A scoping review of physical activity messaging. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1): 51. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[17] 17. Nobles J, Thomas C, Banks Gross Z, et al.: "Let's Talk about Physical Activity": Understanding the Preferences of Under-Served Communities when Messaging Physical Activity Guidelines to the Public. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(8): 2782. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[18] 18. Latimer AE, Brawley LR, Bassett RL: A systematic review of three approaches for constructing physical activity messages: What messages work and what improvements are needed? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010; 7: 36. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[19] 19. Latimer-Cheung AE, Rhodes RE, Kho ME, et al.: Evidence-informed recommendations for constructing and disseminating messages supplementing the new Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines. BMC Public Health. 2013; 13: 419. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[20] 20. Bergeron CD, Tanner AH, Friedman D, et al.: Physical Activity Communication: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Health Promot Pract. 2019; 20(3): 344–353. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Larocca V, Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, Latimer-Cheung A, et al.: Physical Activity Messages for Youth with Disabilities: An Evaluation of Attitudes, Intentions, and Preferences. Health Commun. 2020; 35(8): 974–983. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Gittelsohn J, Steckler A, Johnson CC, et al.: Formative research in school and community-based health programs and studies: "state of the art" and the TAAG approach. Health Educ Behav. 2006; 33(1): 25–39. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[23] 23. Andreasen AR: Social Marketing: Its Definition and Domain. J Pub Pol Market. 1994; 13(1): 108–114. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Brawley LR, Latimer AE: Physical activity guides for Canadians: messaging strategies, realistic expectations for change, and evaluation. Can J Public Health. 2007; 98 Suppl 2: S170–84. PubMed Abstract

[25] 25. Huhman M, Kelly RP, Edgar T: Social Marketing as a Framework for Youth Physical Activity Initiatives: a 10-Year Retrospective on the Legacy of CDC's VERB Campaign. Curr Obes Rep. 2017; 6(2): 101–107. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[26] 26. Huhman ME, Potter LD, Duke JC, et al.: Evaluation of a National Physical Activity Intervention for Children: VERB™ Campaign, 2002–2004. Am J Preven Med. 2007; 32(1): 38–43. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[27] 27. Kreuter MW, Wray RJ: Tailored and targeted health communication: strategies for enhancing information relevance. Am J Health Behav. 2003; 27 Suppl 3: S227–32. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Noar SM, Benac CN, Harris MS: Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychol Bull. 2007; 133(4): 673–93. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[29] 29. Tversky A, Kahneman D: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981; 211(4481): 453–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[30] 30. Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Int J Society Res Meth: Theory Pract. 2005; 8(1): 19–32. Publisher Full Text

[31] 31. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al.: PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169(7): 467–73. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK: Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010; 5: 69. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[33] 33. Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Tricco AC, et al.: Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth. 2020; 18(10): 2119–2126. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, et al.: Rayyan — a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016; 5(1): 210. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[35] 35. Grady CL, Ng K, Murtagh E, et al.: Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What Works? A Scoping Review Protocol. OSF. [Data]. 2022. http://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/BCNS6

[36] 36. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): School health guidelines to promote healthy eating and physical activity. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2011; 60(RR–5): 1–76. PubMed Abstract

Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Rationale for this scoping review

Scoping review aims

Objectives

Methods

Protocol

Discussion

Ethics and dissemination

Data availability

Underlying data

Extended data

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Are you a HRB-funded researcher?

Thank you!

Communicating Physical Activity with Adolescents: What works? A scoping review protocol

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Rationale for this scoping review

Scoping review aims

Objectives

Methods

Protocol

Discussion

Ethics and dissemination

Data availability

Underlying data

Extended data

Acknowledgements

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated

Are you a HRB-funded researcher?

Thank you!