↓ Skip to main content

A cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the GoActive intervention to increase physical activity among adolescents aged 13–14 years

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
32 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the GoActive intervention to increase physical activity among adolescents aged 13–14 years
Published in
BMJ Open, September 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014419
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Elizabeth Brown, Fiona Whittle, Stephanie T Jong, Caroline Croxson, Stephen J Sharp, Paul Wilkinson, Edward CF Wilson, Esther MF van Sluijs, Anna Vignoles, Kirsten Corder

Abstract

Adolescent physical activity promotion is rarely effective, despite adolescence being critical for preventing physical activity decline. Low adolescent physical activity is likely to last into adulthood, increasing health risks. The Get Others Active (GoActive) intervention is evidence-based and was developed iteratively with adolescents and teachers. This intervention aims to increase physical activity through increased peer support, self-efficacy, group cohesion, self-esteem and friendship quality, and is implemented using a tiered-leadership system. We previously established feasibility in one school and conducted a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) in three schools. We will conduct a school-based cluster RCT (CRCT) in 16 secondary schools targeting all year 9 students (n=2400). In eight schools, GoActive will run for two terms: weekly facilitation support from a council-funded intervention facilitator will be offered in term 1, with more distant support in term 2. Tutor groups choose two weekly activities, encouraged by older adolescent mentors and weekly peer leaders. Students gain points for trying new activities; points are entered into a between-class competition. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, interim (week 6), postintervention (week 14-16) and 10-month follow-up (main outcome). The primary outcome will be change from baseline in daily accelerometer-assessed moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Secondary outcomes include accelerometer-assessed activity intensities on weekdays/weekends; self-reported physical activity and psychosocial outcomes; cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses; mixed-methods process evaluation integrating information from focus groups and participation logs/questionnaires. Ethical approval for the conduct of the study was gained from the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee. Given the lack of rigorously evaluated interventions, and the inclusion of objective measurement of physical activity, long-term follow-up and testing of causal pathways, the results of a CRCT of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of GoActive are expected to add substantially to the limited evidence on adolescent physical activity promotion. Workshops will be held with key stakeholders including students, parents, teachers, school governors and government representatives to discuss plans for wider dissemination of the intervention. ISRCTN31583496.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 20%
Unspecified 16 19%
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Other 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 26 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 21%
Sports and Recreations 13 15%
Psychology 8 9%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Other 12 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2019.
All research outputs
#754,339
of 13,715,693 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#1,702
of 12,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,860
of 272,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#79
of 628 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,715,693 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,325 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 628 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.