[操场标记对比久坐生活方式:系统文献综述]。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Fabio Cruciani, Zuzana Mitrova, Patrizia Brigoni, Thellenxa Kalemi, Alice Masini, Rosella Saulle
{"title":"[操场标记对比久坐生活方式:系统文献综述]。","authors":"Fabio Cruciani, Zuzana Mitrova, Patrizia Brigoni, Thellenxa Kalemi, Alice Masini, Rosella Saulle","doi":"10.19191/EP25.2-3.A838.028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour are public health priorities aimed at ensuring health and well-being at all stages of life. Physical activity should be encouraged from early childhood, with play being a key component, including interactive 'floor-based' activities in safe spaces. The introduction of colourful markings in playgrounds and public spaces (such as 'playground markings') may offer a cost-effective and feasible way to promote physical activity, also providing structured opportunities for teachers to support motor skill development.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>to provide evidence of the benefits of playground markings interventions in schools on increasing physical activity levels and enhancing the physical and psychological well-being in pre-school and school-aged children.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>a systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, MedLine, Embase, PsycInfo, and Epistemonikos databases up to 13.02.2024. The primary focus was to identify systematic reviews (SRs) or, in their absence, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs). Study quality was assessed using validated tools according to study design, and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence and results were presented in Summary of Findings (SoF) tables. Studies not included in the meta-analyses due to data unavailability or heterogeneity in outcome measures or interventions were narratively reported.</p><p><strong>Setting and participants: </strong>students aged 3 to 10 years attending preschool and primary school.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>increased physical activity (including light, moderate vigorous and reduction of sedentary lifestyle); reduced obesity, overweight, Body Mass Index; well-being (quality of life, psychological aspect); cognitive level; school performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>a total of 557 records were screened and 35 potentially eligible full-text assessed publications. The review included 14 publications corresponding to 11 studies: 6 RCTs and 5 NRCTs. No systematic reviews were included. Meta-analyses were conducted using data from 2 RCTs, examining outcomes related to reduced sedentary behaviour and increased light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity. No statistically significant differences between comparison groups. The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Four of the 9 studies that were not included in the meta-analysis were RCT studies and 5 non-randomized studies reported heterogeneous results with respect to the physical activity outcome with some outcomes showing an effect in favour of the intervention while others reported no effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>multi-coloured playground markings consist of a low-cost approach to promote physical activity in children. However, the results reported by the few available studies in both pre-school and school-age children are inconclusive.</p>","PeriodicalId":50511,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione","volume":"49 2-3","pages":"200-207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Playground marking for contrasting sedentary lifestyle: systematic literature review].\",\"authors\":\"Fabio Cruciani, Zuzana Mitrova, Patrizia Brigoni, Thellenxa Kalemi, Alice Masini, Rosella Saulle\",\"doi\":\"10.19191/EP25.2-3.A838.028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour are public health priorities aimed at ensuring health and well-being at all stages of life. Physical activity should be encouraged from early childhood, with play being a key component, including interactive 'floor-based' activities in safe spaces. The introduction of colourful markings in playgrounds and public spaces (such as 'playground markings') may offer a cost-effective and feasible way to promote physical activity, also providing structured opportunities for teachers to support motor skill development.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>to provide evidence of the benefits of playground markings interventions in schools on increasing physical activity levels and enhancing the physical and psychological well-being in pre-school and school-aged children.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>a systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, MedLine, Embase, PsycInfo, and Epistemonikos databases up to 13.02.2024. The primary focus was to identify systematic reviews (SRs) or, in their absence, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs). Study quality was assessed using validated tools according to study design, and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence and results were presented in Summary of Findings (SoF) tables. Studies not included in the meta-analyses due to data unavailability or heterogeneity in outcome measures or interventions were narratively reported.</p><p><strong>Setting and participants: </strong>students aged 3 to 10 years attending preschool and primary school.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>increased physical activity (including light, moderate vigorous and reduction of sedentary lifestyle); reduced obesity, overweight, Body Mass Index; well-being (quality of life, psychological aspect); cognitive level; school performance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>a total of 557 records were screened and 35 potentially eligible full-text assessed publications. The review included 14 publications corresponding to 11 studies: 6 RCTs and 5 NRCTs. No systematic reviews were included. Meta-analyses were conducted using data from 2 RCTs, examining outcomes related to reduced sedentary behaviour and increased light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity. No statistically significant differences between comparison groups. The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Four of the 9 studies that were not included in the meta-analysis were RCT studies and 5 non-randomized studies reported heterogeneous results with respect to the physical activity outcome with some outcomes showing an effect in favour of the intervention while others reported no effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>multi-coloured playground markings consist of a low-cost approach to promote physical activity in children. However, the results reported by the few available studies in both pre-school and school-age children are inconclusive.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione\",\"volume\":\"49 2-3\",\"pages\":\"200-207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19191/EP25.2-3.A838.028\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologia & Prevenzione","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19191/EP25.2-3.A838.028","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:促进身体活动和减少久坐行为是公共卫生重点,旨在确保生命各个阶段的健康和福祉。应从幼儿时期开始鼓励身体活动,其中游戏是一个关键组成部分,包括在安全空间进行的互动式“地板上”活动。在操场和公共场所引入彩色标记(如“操场标记”)可以提供一种经济有效且可行的方式来促进身体活动,也为教师提供结构化的机会来支持运动技能的发展。目的:提供证据,证明学校操场标记干预措施对增加学前和学龄儿童的身体活动水平和改善身心健康的好处。设计:系统检索Cochrane Library、MedLine、Embase、PsycInfo和Epistemonikos数据库,检索时间截止到13.02.2024。主要重点是确定系统评价(SRs),或者在没有系统评价的情况下,确定随机对照试验(rct)和非随机对照试验(NRCTs)。根据研究设计使用经过验证的工具评估研究质量,并在可行的情况下进行meta分析。GRADE方法用于评估证据的确定性,结果显示在结论摘要(SoF)表中。由于数据不可获得或结果测量或干预措施的异质性而未纳入meta分析的研究进行了叙述性报道。设置和参与者:3 - 10岁学龄前和小学的学生。主要结果指标:增加身体活动(包括轻度、中度剧烈运动和减少久坐生活方式);减少肥胖、超重、身体质量指数;幸福(生活质量,心理方面);认知水平;在学校的表现。结果:共筛选了557份记录和35份可能符合条件的全文评估出版物。本综述包括14篇出版物,对应11项研究:6项rct和5项nrct。未纳入系统评价。荟萃分析使用了2项随机对照试验的数据,检查了减少久坐行为和增加轻度、中度和剧烈体育活动的相关结果。各组间差异无统计学意义。所有结果的证据确定性都很低。未纳入荟萃分析的9项研究中有4项是随机对照试验研究,5项非随机研究报告了关于体力活动结果的不同结果,其中一些结果显示有利于干预的效果,而另一些结果则没有影响。结论:五颜六色的操场标志是一种低成本的促进儿童体育活动的方法。然而,对学龄前儿童和学龄儿童进行的少数可用研究报告的结果尚无定论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Playground marking for contrasting sedentary lifestyle: systematic literature review].

Background: promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behaviour are public health priorities aimed at ensuring health and well-being at all stages of life. Physical activity should be encouraged from early childhood, with play being a key component, including interactive 'floor-based' activities in safe spaces. The introduction of colourful markings in playgrounds and public spaces (such as 'playground markings') may offer a cost-effective and feasible way to promote physical activity, also providing structured opportunities for teachers to support motor skill development.

Objectives: to provide evidence of the benefits of playground markings interventions in schools on increasing physical activity levels and enhancing the physical and psychological well-being in pre-school and school-aged children.

Design: a systematic literature search was conducted in Cochrane Library, MedLine, Embase, PsycInfo, and Epistemonikos databases up to 13.02.2024. The primary focus was to identify systematic reviews (SRs) or, in their absence, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs). Study quality was assessed using validated tools according to study design, and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence and results were presented in Summary of Findings (SoF) tables. Studies not included in the meta-analyses due to data unavailability or heterogeneity in outcome measures or interventions were narratively reported.

Setting and participants: students aged 3 to 10 years attending preschool and primary school.

Main outcome measures: increased physical activity (including light, moderate vigorous and reduction of sedentary lifestyle); reduced obesity, overweight, Body Mass Index; well-being (quality of life, psychological aspect); cognitive level; school performance.

Results: a total of 557 records were screened and 35 potentially eligible full-text assessed publications. The review included 14 publications corresponding to 11 studies: 6 RCTs and 5 NRCTs. No systematic reviews were included. Meta-analyses were conducted using data from 2 RCTs, examining outcomes related to reduced sedentary behaviour and increased light, moderate, and vigorous physical activity. No statistically significant differences between comparison groups. The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Four of the 9 studies that were not included in the meta-analysis were RCT studies and 5 non-randomized studies reported heterogeneous results with respect to the physical activity outcome with some outcomes showing an effect in favour of the intervention while others reported no effect.

Conclusions: multi-coloured playground markings consist of a low-cost approach to promote physical activity in children. However, the results reported by the few available studies in both pre-school and school-age children are inconclusive.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiologia & Prevenzione
Epidemiologia & Prevenzione 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiologia & Prevenzione, oggi organo della Associazione italiana di epidemiologia, raccoglie buona parte delle migliori e originali esperienze italiane di ricerca epidemiologica e di studio degli interventi per la prevenzione e la sanità pubblica. La rivista – indicizzata su Medline e dotata di Impact Factor – è un canale importante anche per la segnalazione al pubblico internazionale di contributi che altrimenti circolerebbero soltanto in Italia. E&P in questi decenni ha svolto una funzione di riferimento per la sanità pubblica ma anche per i cittadini e le loro diverse forme di aggregazione. Il principio che l’ha ispirata era, e rimane, che l’epidemiologia ha senso se è funzionale alla prevenzione e alla sanità pubblica e che la prevenzione ha ben poche possibilità di realizzarsi se non si fonda su valide basi scientifiche e se non c’è la partecipazione di tutti i soggetti interessati. Modalità di comunicazione aggiornate, metodologia statistica ed epidemiologica rigorosa, validità degli studi e solidità delle interpretazioni dei risultati sono la solida matrice su cui E&P è costruita. A questa si accompagna una forte responsabilità etica verso la salute pubblica, che oggi ha ampliato in forma irreversibile il suo orizzonte, e include in forma sempre più consapevole non solo gli esseri umani, ma l’intero pianeta e le modificazioni che l’uomo apporta all’universo in cui vive. L’ambizione è che l’offerta di nuovi strumenti di comunicazione, informazione e formazione, soprattutto attraverso l''uso di internet, renda la rivista non solo un tradizionale veicolo di contenuti e analisi scientifiche, ma anche un potente strumento a disposizione di una comunità di interessi e di valori che ha a cuore la salute pubblica.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信