• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

旨在增加儿童身体活动、减少久坐行为和增加水果与蔬菜摄入量的干预措施对儿童的影响:积极生活 5 年(AFLY5)基于学校的群组随机对照试验。

Effect of intervention aimed at increasing physical activity, reducing sedentary behaviour, and increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children: active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school based cluster randomised controlled trial.

机构信息

School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.

School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2BN, UK.

出版信息

BMJ. 2014 May 27;348:g3256. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g3256.

DOI:10.1136/bmj.g3256
PMID:24865166
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4035503/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of a school based intervention to increase physical activity, reduce sedentary behaviour, and increase fruit and vegetable consumption in children.

DESIGN

Cluster randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

60 primary schools in the south west of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary school children who were in school year 4 (age 8-9 years) at recruitment and baseline assessment, in year 5 during the intervention, and at the end of year 5 (age 9-10) at follow-up assessment.

INTERVENTION

The Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) intervention consisted of teacher training, provision of lesson and child-parent interactive homework plans, all materials required for lessons and homework, and written materials for school newsletters and parents. The intervention was delivered when children were in school year 5 (age 9-10 years). Schools allocated to control received standard teaching.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The pre-specified primary outcomes were accelerometer assessed minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day, accelerometer assessed minutes of sedentary behaviour per day, and reported daily consumption of servings of fruit and vegetables.

RESULTS

60 schools with more than 2221 children were recruited; valid data were available for fruit and vegetable consumption for 2121 children, for accelerometer assessed physical activity and sedentary behaviour for 1252 children, and for secondary outcomes for between 1825 and 2212 children for the main analyses. None of the three primary outcomes differed between children in schools allocated to the AFLY5 intervention and those allocated to the control group. The difference in means comparing the intervention group with the control group was -1.35 (95% confidence interval -5.29 to 2.59) minutes per day for moderate to vigorous physical activity, -0.11 (-9.71 to 9.49) minutes per day for sedentary behaviour, and 0.08 (-0.12 to 0.28) servings per day for fruit and vegetable consumption. The intervention was effective for three out of nine of the secondary outcomes after multiple testing was taken into account: self reported time spent in screen viewing at the weekend (-21 (-37 to -4) minutes per day), self reported servings of snacks per day (-0.22 (-0.38 to -0.05)), and servings of high energy drinks per day (-0.26 (-0.43 to -0.10)) were all reduced. Results from a series of sensitivity analyses testing different assumptions about missing data and from per protocol analyses produced similar results.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that the AFLY5 school based intervention is not effective at increasing levels of physical activity, decreasing sedentary behaviour, and increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in primary school children. Change in these activities may require more intensive behavioural interventions with children or upstream interventions at the family and societal level, as well as at the school environment level. These findings have relevance for researchers, policy makers, public health practitioners, and doctors who are involved in health promotion, policy making, and commissioning services. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN50133740.

摘要

目的

探究一项基于学校的干预措施对增加儿童身体活动、减少久坐行为和增加水果与蔬菜摄入量的效果。

设计

整群随机对照试验。

设置

英格兰西南部的 60 所小学。

参与者

在招募和基线评估时处于学校 4 年级(8-9 岁)、在干预期间处于 5 年级、在随访评估时处于 5 年级末(9-10 岁)的小学生。

干预措施

Active for Life Year 5(AFLY5)干预措施包括教师培训、提供课程和儿童-家长互动作业计划、所有课程和作业所需的材料以及学校通讯和家长用书面材料。干预措施在儿童 5 年级(9-10 岁)时进行。分配到对照组的学校接受标准教学。

主要结局测量指标

预先指定的主要结局指标为每天中度至剧烈体力活动的加速度计评估分钟数、每天久坐行为的加速度计评估分钟数以及报告的每日水果和蔬菜摄入量。

结果

招募了 60 所拥有超过 2221 名儿童的学校;2121 名儿童的水果和蔬菜摄入量、1252 名儿童的加速度计评估体力活动和久坐行为以及 1825 至 2212 名儿童的次要结局的有效数据均可用于主要分析。与分配到 AFLY5 干预组的儿童相比,分配到对照组的儿童在这三个主要结局指标上没有差异。干预组与对照组相比的平均差值为:中度至剧烈体力活动增加 1.35(95%置信区间-5.29 至 2.59)分钟/天、久坐行为减少 0.11(-9.71 至 9.49)分钟/天、水果和蔬菜摄入量增加 0.08(-0.12 至 0.28)份/天。在考虑多次测试后,该干预措施对九个次要结局中的三个具有有效性:周末自我报告的屏幕观看时间减少了 21(-37 至-4)分钟/天)、自我报告的每日零食份数减少了 0.22(-0.38 至-0.05))以及每日高能量饮料份数减少了 0.26(-0.43 至-0.10))。对缺失数据进行了一系列敏感性分析和按方案分析,得到了类似的结果。

结论

研究结果表明,AFLY5 基于学校的干预措施对增加小学生的身体活动水平、减少久坐行为和增加水果与蔬菜摄入量没有效果。这些活动的变化可能需要对儿童进行更强化的行为干预,或者在家庭和社会层面以及学校环境层面进行上游干预。这些研究结果对参与健康促进、政策制定和服务委托的研究人员、政策制定者、公共卫生从业者和医生具有重要意义。

试验注册

当前对照试验 ISRCTN50133740。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d158/4793634/5832b07f3647/kipr017462.f1_default.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d158/4793634/5832b07f3647/kipr017462.f1_default.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d158/4793634/5832b07f3647/kipr017462.f1_default.jpg

相似文献

1
Effect of intervention aimed at increasing physical activity, reducing sedentary behaviour, and increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children: active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school based cluster randomised controlled trial.旨在增加儿童身体活动、减少久坐行为和增加水果与蔬菜摄入量的干预措施对儿童的影响:积极生活 5 年(AFLY5)基于学校的群组随机对照试验。
BMJ. 2014 May 27;348:g3256. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g3256.
2
3
Long-term effects of the Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school-based cluster-randomised controlled trial.“终身积极”项目五年级(AFLY5)校本整群随机对照试验的长期影响
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 24;6(11):e010957. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010957.
4
The Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school-based cluster randomised controlled trial: effect on potential mediators.“活力一生”五年级(AFLY5)基于学校的整群随机对照试验:对潜在中介因素的影响
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jan 22;16:68. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-2734-5.
5
The Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school based cluster randomised controlled trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.积极生活 5 年(AFLY5)基于学校的整群随机对照试验:一项随机对照试验的研究方案。
Trials. 2011 Jul 24;12:181. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-181.
6
The CHIRPY DRAGON intervention in preventing obesity in Chinese primary-school--aged children: A cluster-randomised controlled trial.振翅之龙干预对中国小学生肥胖预防的效果:一项整群随机对照试验
PLoS Med. 2019 Nov 26;16(11):e1002971. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002971. eCollection 2019 Nov.
7
Interventions for increasing fruit and vegetable consumption in children aged five years and under.增加 5 岁及以下儿童水果和蔬菜摄入量的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Sep 23;9(9):CD008552. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008552.pub8.
8
Randomised controlled trial of primary school based intervention to reduce risk factors for obesity.基于小学的干预措施以降低肥胖风险因素的随机对照试验。
BMJ. 2001 Nov 3;323(7320):1029-32. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7320.1029.
9
Study protocol: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a school based fruit and vegetable intervention - Project Tomato.研究方案:一项基于学校的水果和蔬菜干预措施——“番茄项目”的整群随机对照试验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Jun 16;9:101. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-101.
10
Intervention fidelity in a school-based diet and physical activity intervention in the UK: Active for Life Year 5.英国一项基于学校的饮食与体育活动干预中的干预保真度:“积极生活第5年”。
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015 Nov 11;12:141. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0300-7.

引用本文的文献

1
School-Based Homework Interventions for Improving 24-hour Movement Behaviours in Primary School Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.基于学校的家庭作业干预对改善小学生24小时运动行为的影响:系统评价与Meta分析
Sports Med Open. 2025 Aug 9;11(1):94. doi: 10.1186/s40798-025-00898-7.
2
Which school-based interventions work better to combat obesity in children? A network meta-analysis.哪些基于学校的干预措施在对抗儿童肥胖方面效果更佳?一项网状Meta分析。
Syst Rev. 2025 Jun 10;14(1):125. doi: 10.1186/s13643-025-02871-7.
3
Characteristics of Combined Movement Behavior Interventions in Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review.

本文引用的文献

1
The Active for Life Year 5 (AFLY5) school-based cluster randomised controlled trial protocol: detailed statistical analysis plan.“积极生活五年(AFLY5)”基于学校的整群随机对照试验方案:详细统计分析计划
Trials. 2013 Jul 24;14:234. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-234.
2
The Vienna declaration on nutrition and non-communicable diseases.《维也纳营养与非传染性疾病宣言》
BMJ. 2013 Jul 15;347:f4417. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f4417.
3
Increasing physical activity in young primary school children--it's child's play: a cluster randomised controlled trial.
儿童和青少年联合运动行为干预的特征:一项范围综述
Obes Rev. 2025 Oct;26(10):e13943. doi: 10.1111/obr.13943. Epub 2025 Jun 4.
4
Are school-based behavioural interventions an effective strategy for improving physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents? A meta-analysis.基于学校的行为干预措施是改善儿童和青少年身体活动及久坐行为的有效策略吗?一项荟萃分析。
Front Pediatr. 2025 Mar 11;13:1532035. doi: 10.3389/fped.2025.1532035. eCollection 2025.
5
Research quality and dissemination of paediatric randomised controlled trials with and without patient and family engagement: systematic review.有或没有患者及家庭参与的儿科随机对照试验的研究质量与传播:系统评价
BMJ Open. 2025 Mar 12;15(3):e086934. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086934.
6
Comparative effectiveness of school-based obesity prevention programs for children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.针对儿童和青少年的校本肥胖预防计划的比较效果:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析。
Front Public Health. 2024 Dec 17;12:1504279. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1504279. eCollection 2024.
7
Waist circumference as a parameter in school-based interventions to prevent overweight and obesity - a systematic review and meta-analysis.腰围作为预防超重和肥胖的基于学校干预措施的参数:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Public Health. 2024 Oct 17;24(1):2864. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20354-7.
8
Household- and community-level factors of zero vegetable or fruit consumption among children aged 6-23 months in East Africa.东非6至23个月大儿童零蔬菜或水果摄入量的家庭及社区层面因素
Front Nutr. 2024 Jun 19;11:1363061. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1363061. eCollection 2024.
9
Interventions to prevent obesity in children aged 5 to 11 years old.预防 5 至 11 岁儿童肥胖的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 20;5(5):CD015328. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015328.pub2.
10
Determinants of physical activity habit formation: a theory-based qualitative study among young adults.体力活动习惯形成的决定因素:基于理论的年轻人定性研究。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2024 Dec;19(1):2341984. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2024.2341984. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
增加小学儿童的身体活动量——这是轻而易举的事:一项整群随机对照试验。
Prev Med. 2013 May;56(5):319-25. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.02.007. Epub 2013 Feb 24.
4
School-based physical activity programs for promoting physical activity and fitness in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18.以学校为基础的体育活动项目,旨在促进6至18岁儿童和青少年的体育活动及健康。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Feb 28;2013(2):CD007651. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007651.pub2.
5
Are interventions to promote physical activity in children a waste of time?促进儿童身体活动的干预措施是在浪费时间吗?
BMJ. 2012 Sep 27;345:e6320. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e6320.
6
Effectiveness of intervention on physical activity of children: systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials with objectively measured outcomes (EarlyBird 54).干预措施对儿童身体活动效果的影响:基于客观测量结局的对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析(EarlyBird54)。
BMJ. 2012 Sep 27;345:e5888. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5888.
7
Systematic review and meta-analysis of school-based interventions to improve daily fruit and vegetable intake in children aged 5 to 12 y.系统评价和荟萃分析:以学校为基础的干预措施对改善 5 至 12 岁儿童每日水果和蔬菜摄入量的效果
Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Oct;96(4):889-901. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.111.030270. Epub 2012 Sep 5.
8
Including all individuals is not enough: lessons for intention-to-treat analysis.纳入所有个体并不足够:意向治疗分析的教训。
Clin Trials. 2012 Aug;9(4):396-407. doi: 10.1177/1740774512450098. Epub 2012 Jul 2.
9
Primary prevention of overweight in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of interventions aiming to decrease sedentary behaviour.儿童和青少年超重的一级预防:旨在减少久坐行为的干预措施的有效性的荟萃分析。
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012 May 28;9:61. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-61.
10
Effect of shared environmental factors on exercise behavior from age 7 to 12 years.共享环境因素对 7 至 12 岁儿童运动行为的影响。
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Oct;44(10):2025-32. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31825d358e.