Comparative effectiveness of school- and office-based technology-enhanced interventions for physical activity promotion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.4 3区医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Preventive Medicine Reports Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-13 DOI:10.1016/j.pmedr.2026.103409

Mitch Wyatt, Mickey Bolyard, Lingyi Fu, Hayley Almes, Frank Adutwum Jnr, Charles Rodgers, Ryan D. Burns

{"title":"Comparative effectiveness of school- and office-based technology-enhanced interventions for physical activity promotion: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Mitch Wyatt, Mickey Bolyard, Lingyi Fu, Hayley Almes, Frank Adutwum Jnr, Charles Rodgers, Ryan D. Burns","doi":"10.1016/j.pmedr.2026.103409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>School students and office workers can have higher levels of physical inactivity. Comparative effectiveness of interventions that use technology-based strategies to promote physical activity (PA) between these two populations is lacking. The purpose of this review was to compare effectiveness of technology-based interventions to promote PA in school and office settings.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A literature search was conducted from each database's inception with no place restriction using PubMed/MEDLINE (1946), Scopus (2004), Web of Science (1964), Embase (1974), and Cochrane Library (1995) through January 1st, 2025. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials examining school-aged children/adolescents or adult office workers participating in a technology-based intervention to promote PA. Effectiveness was examined using random-effects meta-analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ten school-based and five office-based studies were examined. Two of 10 (20%) school-based studies and two of five (40%) office-based studies showed high risk of bias. There was a significant but small positive effect for school-based interventions to improve PA (Hedges' g = 0.35, 95%CI [0.02, 0.68]) but not for office-based interventions (Hedges' g = 0.07, 95%CI [−0.19, 0.33]).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>School-based interventions using technology showed a small positive effect for improving PA. More novel, undisruptive, and effective strategies using technology should be derived and rigorously tested in school and office settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38066,"journal":{"name":"Preventive Medicine Reports","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 103409"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Preventive Medicine Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335526000379","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

School students and office workers can have higher levels of physical inactivity. Comparative effectiveness of interventions that use technology-based strategies to promote physical activity (PA) between these two populations is lacking. The purpose of this review was to compare effectiveness of technology-based interventions to promote PA in school and office settings.

Methods

A literature search was conducted from each database's inception with no place restriction using PubMed/MEDLINE (1946), Scopus (2004), Web of Science (1964), Embase (1974), and Cochrane Library (1995) through January 1st, 2025. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials examining school-aged children/adolescents or adult office workers participating in a technology-based intervention to promote PA. Effectiveness was examined using random-effects meta-analyses.

Results

Ten school-based and five office-based studies were examined. Two of 10 (20%) school-based studies and two of five (40%) office-based studies showed high risk of bias. There was a significant but small positive effect for school-based interventions to improve PA (Hedges' g = 0.35, 95%CI [0.02, 0.68]) but not for office-based interventions (Hedges' g = 0.07, 95%CI [−0.19, 0.33]).

Conclusions

School-based interventions using technology showed a small positive effect for improving PA. More novel, undisruptive, and effective strategies using technology should be derived and rigorously tested in school and office settings.

查看原文本刊更多论文

以学校和办公室为基础的促进身体活动的技术增强干预措施的比较有效性：系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的：在校学生和办公室工作人员可能有较高水平的缺乏运动。在这两个人群中，缺乏使用基于技术的策略来促进身体活动的干预措施的比较有效性。本综述的目的是比较以技术为基础的干预措施在学校和办公室环境中促进PA的有效性。方法：通过PubMed/MEDLINE（1946年）、Scopus（2004年）、Web of Science（1964年）、Embase（1974年）和Cochrane Library（1995年）等数据库进行文献检索，检索时间为2025年1月1日。纳入标准包括随机对照试验，检查学龄儿童/青少年或成年办公室工作人员参与基于技术的干预以促进PA。使用随机效应荟萃分析检验有效性。结果：10项校本研究和5项办公室研究被检查。10项以学校为基础的研究中有2项（20%），5项以办公室为基础的研究中有2项（40%）显示出较高的偏见风险。以学校为基础的干预对改善PA有显著但很小的积极作用（Hedges' g = 0.35, 95%CI[0.02, 0.68]），但对以办公室为基础的干预没有积极作用（Hedges' g = 0.07, 95%CI[-0.19, 0.33]）。结论：以学校为基础的技术干预对改善PA有一定的积极作用。应该采用更新颖、不具破坏性和更有效的技术策略，并在学校和办公室环境中进行严格的测试。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊