A cluster randomized controlled trial of the be the best you can be intervention: effects on the psychological and physical well-being of school children

BMC Public Health

Fiona B Gillison¹  Sean P Cumming¹  Martyn Standage¹ 

[1] Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK

关键词: Modifiable risk factors;    Adolescent;    Children;    Self-determination theory;    Communication;    School;    Well-being;    Health;    Motivation;   

Others  :  1162016
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-13-666

 received in 2013-06-11, accepted in 2013-06-18,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The ‘Be the Best You Can Be’ (BtBYCB) program is a school-based intervention designed to foster positive physical, psychological, and social development via empowering young people to take ownership over their own personal development. The aim of this work is to determine the effectiveness of the BtBYCB program on (i) pupils’ well-being, self-perceptions, self-esteem, aspirations, and learning strategies; and (ii) changes in modifiable health-risk behaviors (i.e., physical activity, diet, smoking, and alcohol consumption).

Methods/design

A two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial employing a wait-list control plus qualitative and mixed-method evaluations was used. Participants were school pupils from Years 7 and 8 (aged 11–13 years). Ten schools located in southwest England were randomly allocated to receive the BtBYCB intervention (n = 5 schools; 711 pupils) or a control condition (i.e., usual Personal, Social, and Health Education classes) (n = 5 schools; 622 pupils). Participants in the intervention condition received a program consisting of (i) a talk from an Olympian/Paralympian; (ii) 11 one-hour teacher-led PSHE classroom sessions in which pupils identified their aspirations, values, and interests and explored and acted on these via activities such as personal development planning, goal-setting, and peer-mentoring; and (iii) participated in a celebration event (e.g., second visit from Olympian/Paralympian and short individual presentations). Data were collected at baseline, post-intervention, and at 3-month follow-up.

Focus groups (pupils and teachers) and individual interviews (headteachers) were conducted in the 5 intervention schools to (i) gain an in-depth understanding of mechanisms of change; (ii) explore ways in which the participants’ motivation and engagement could be enhanced, and (iii) elicit user-feedback pertaining to how the program, content, and appeal could be improved.

A mixed-method approach was used to describe and explain the differing experiences of particular groupings within and across the intervention schools; i.e., those for whom the program was effective, those that experienced little, if any change, and those for whom the program led to an inverse effect.

Discussion

The findings of this work will provide insight into the effectiveness of an innovative and child-centered program. The research will inform improvements to the BtBYCB program as well as other interventions targeting child/youth health and wellness.

Trial registration

The trial is registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN99443695.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Standage et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Department for Education and Skills: Every Child Matters: Green Paper. London: The Stationery Office; 2003.
• [2]Qualifications and Curriculum Authority: The National Curriculum: Statuary requirements for key stages 3 and 4 from September 2008. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority; 2008.
• [3]Department for Education and Skills and Department of Health: National Healthy School Status. London: Department of Health; 2005.
• [4]Health Development Agency: Participatory approaches in health promotion and health planning: A literature review. London: Health Development Agency; 2000.
• [5]Deci EL, Ryan RM: Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press; 1985.
• [6]Deci EL, Ryan RM: The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 2000, 11:227-268.
• [7]Vallerand RJ, Fortier MS, Guay F: Self-determination and persistence in a real-life setting: toward a motivational model of high-school drop out. J Pers Soc Psychol 1997, 72:1161-1176.
• [8]Grolnick WS, Ryan RM: Autonomy in children's learning: an experimental and individual difference investigation. J Pers Soc Psychol 1987, 52:890-898.
• [9]Soenens B, Vansteenkiste M: Antecedents and outcomes of self-determination in three life domains: the role of parents’ and teachers’ autonomy support. J Youth Adolescence 2005, 34:589-604.
• [10]Black AE, Deci EL: The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: a self-determination theory perspective. Sci Educ 2000, 84:740-756.
• [11]Connell JP, Wellborn JG: Competence, autonomy and relatedness: a motivational analysis of self-system processes. In The Minnesota symposium on child psychology: Vol. 22. Self-processes in Development . Edited by Gunnar LA, Sroufe LA. Erlbaum: Hillsdale NJ; 1990:43-77.
• [12]Deci EL, Ryan RM (Eds): Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press; 2002.
• [13]Standage M, Ryan RM: Self-determination theory and exercise motivation: Facilitating self-regulatory processes to support and maintain health and well-being. In Advances in motivation in sport and exercise. 3rd edition. Edited by Roberts GC, Treasure DC. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2012:233-270.
• [14]Johnson DE, Johnson R: Cooperative learning and social interdependence theory. In Theory and research on small groups. Edited by Tindale R, Heath L, Edwards J, Posavac E, Bryant F, Suzrez-Balcazar Y, Henderson-King E, Myers J. New York: Plenum; 1998:9-36.
• [15]Vansteenkiste M, Simons J, Lens W, Sheldon KM, Deci EL: Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. J Pers Soc Psychol 2004, 87:246-260.
• [16]Vansteenkiste M, Simons J, Lens W, Soenens B, Matos L: Examining the impact of extrinsic versus intrinsic goal framing and internally controlling versus autonomy-supportive communication style upon early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Dev 2005, 2:483-501.
• [17]Deci EL, Eghrari H, Patrick BC, Leone D: Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. J Pers 1994, 62:119-142.
• [18]Deci EL, Vansteenkiste M: Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: understanding human development in positive psychology. Ricerche di Psichologia 2004, 27:17-34.
• [19]Brannen J: Mixed Methods Research: A discussion paper. In ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, Methods Review Paper (NCRM). Southampton: NCRM; 2005.
• [20]Creswell JW: Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003.
• [21]Health Services Research Unit: Cluster Sample Size Calculator ver 1.0.2. Aberdeen. UK: University of Aberdeen; 1999. http://www.abdn.ac.uk/hsru/documents/calculationmanual.pdf webcite
• [22]OECD: Education at a glance 2008. Download available. http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/educationataglance2008oecdindicators.htm webcite
• [23]Epstein L, Valoski AM, Kalarchian MA, McCurley J: Do children lose and maintain weight easier than adults? A comparison of child and parent weight changes from six months to ten years. Obesity Res. 1995, 3:411-417.
• [24]Malina RM: Anthropometry. In Physiological Assessment of Human Fitness. Edited by Maud PJ, Foster C. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1995:205-219.
• [25]Deci EL, Ryan RM: Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: an introduction. J Happiness Stud 2008, 9:1-11.
• [26]Ryan RM, Huta V, Deci EL: Living well: A Self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. J Happiness Stud 2008, 9:139-170.
• [27]Huppert FA, Whittington JE: Evidence for the independence of positive and negative well-being: implications for quality of life assessment. Brit J Health Psych 2003, 8:107-122.
• [28]Waterman AS: Two conceptions of happiness: contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. J Pers Soc Psychol 1993, 64:678-691.
• [29]Kasser T, Ryan RM: Further examining the American dream: differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Pers Soc Psychol B 1996, 22:280-287.
• [30]Goodman R: The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: a research note. J Child Psychol Psyc 1997, 38:581-586.
• [31]Ryan RM, Frederick CM: On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. J Pers 1997, 65:529-565.
• [32]Schmitz GS, Schwarzer R: Proaktive Einstellung von Lehrern: Konstruktbeschreibung und psychometrische Analysen. Zeitschrift für Empirische Pädagogik 1999, 13:3-27. The English version has been used and supported in a number of studies e.g., Tennant et al., 2002. Lancet, 360, 1280–1286
• [33]Laurent J, Catanzaro SJ, Joiner TE Jr, Rudolph KD, Potter KI, Lambert S, Osborne L, Gathright T: A measure of positive and negative affect for children: Scale development and initial validation. Psychol Assessment 1999, 11:326-338.
• [34]Funk BA III, Huebner S, Valois RF: Reliability and validity of a Brief Life Satisfaction Scale with a high school sample. J Happiness Stud 2006, 7:41-54.
• [35]Rosenberg M: Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1965.
• [36]Midgley C, Maehr ML, Hruda LZ, Anderman E, Anderman L, Freeman KE, Gheen M, Kaplan A, Kumar R, Middleton MJ, Nelson J, Roeser R, Urdan T: Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scale (PALS). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan; 2000.
• [37]Kowalski KC, Crocker PRE, Kowalski NP: Convergent validity of the Physical Activity Questionnaire for Adolescents. Pediatr Exerc Sci 1997, 9:342-352.
• [38]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): methodology of the youth risk behavior surveillance system. In MMWR. Volume 53. Atlanta, GA: CDC; 2004:1-14.
• [39]Slimani N, Ferrari P, Ocke M, Welch A, Boeing H, Liere M, Pala V, Amiano P, Lagiou A, Mattisson I, Stripp C, Engeset D, Charrondiere R, Buzzard M, Staveren W, Riboli E: Standardization of the 24-hour diet recall calibration method used in the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC): general concepts and preliminary results. Eur J Clin Nutr 2000, 54:900-917.
• [40]de Vries SI, Bakker I, Hopman-Rock M, Hirasing RA, van Mechelen W: Clinimetric review of motion sensors in children and adolescents. J Clin Epidemiol 2006, 59:670-680.
• [41]Williams GC, Deci EL: Internalization of biopsychosocial values by medical students: a test of self-determination theory. J Pers Soc Psychol 1996, 70:767-779.
• [42]Standage M, Duda JL, Ntoumanis N: A model of contextual motivation in physical education: using constructs from self-determination and achievement goal theories to predict physical activity intentions. J Educ Psychol 2003, 95:97-110.
• [43]Ryan RM, Connell JP: Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989, 57:749-761.
• [44]Ryan RM: Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: an extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J Pers Soc Psychol 1982, 43:450-461.
• [45]Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN: Focus groups: Theory and practice. London: Sage; 1990.
• [46]Huberman AM, Miles MB: The qualitative researcher’s companion. London: Sage; 2002.
• [47]Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS, Cheong YF, Congdon RT, du Toit M: HLM 7: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling [Computer Program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International; 2011.
• [48]Smith JA, Osborn M: Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Qualitative psychology. A practical guide to research methods. Edited by Smith JA. London: Sage; 2003:51-80.
• [49]Golafshani N: Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report 2003, 8:597-607.
• [50]Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D: CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010, 340:c332.