Background
Purpose
Methods
Approach
Search and screening
Eligibility criteria
Data extraction
Quality assessment
Data synthesis/analysis
Reliability of method
Results
Characteristics of eligible studies
Author, year | Province | Evaluation type | Methods | Data source(s) | Study participants (n = sample size) | Evaluation indicators/questions | Main findings related to DPA |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Patton, 2012 | ON | Implement | QUANT | Survey | Teachers (n = 145) | % implementation, implementation approaches, teacher’s perspectives (supports and barriers, attitudes) | 45% often or always conduct DPA on days with no PE; 85% report sufficient resources and 89% report sufficient knowledge; 46% think DPA should be more structured; 65% reported lack of monitoring; 60% support DPA |
Patton et al. 2014 | ON | Implement | QUANT | Survey | Students (n = 146) | Implementation approaches, barriers, attitudes | 46% reported DPA every day there is not PE; barriers: student disruption, withholding DPA as punishment; majority of students agree that there is enough space/equipment/time to do DPA every fday and majority enjoy it |
AGO, 2013 | ON | Implement | MIXED | Survey, interviews, document review | School boards (teachers and principals) (n = unknown) | Procedures for implementing, monitoring and measurement and reporting of DPA in schools | Neither the Ministry or school boards are monitoring implementation; majority of principals reported students not getting DPA; barriers: lack of time and space, focus on literacy |
Strampel et al. 2014 | ON | Implement | MIXED | Survey (with open-ended questions) | Teachers (n = 137) | Barriers and possible solutions to DPA implementation | Barriers: lack of time, resources, space, and staff and student buy-in; possible solutions: new games with minimal equipment, more indoor DPA activities, better infrastructure, more resources, whole-school DPA approach, student leaders/DPA role models, school-community links for DPA |
Robertson-Wilson and Lévesque, 2009 | ON | Implement | QUAL | Archival documents | N/A | Framework used to examine implementation approaches and challenges | DPA policy accounts for several factors (allocation of resources, task specification) important for implementation but not all (sustainability of resources, policy value, evaluation plans) |
Brown and Elliott, 2015 | ON | Implement | QUAL | Semi-structured interviews | Teachers (n = 14) and principals (n = 5) | DPA implementation approaches, facilitators, barriers, perceived outcomes, and suggestions for change | Approaches: multiple breaks, student-led activities, integration into other subjects; facilitators: staff support, available resources, training sessions; barriers: lack of time, space, equipment, training, student motivation, and monitoring; outcomes: increased focus, enjoyment, classroom environment; suggestions: whole-community approach, more space, resources, and monitoring |
Rickwood, 2015 | ON | Implement | QUAL | Semi-structured interviews | Teachers (n = 5) and school administrators (n = 4) | Perceived barriers, association between beliefs about DPA policy and student PA levels | Barriers: diminishing priority of DPA, used as a behavior management strategy, lack of student motivation |
Allison et al. 2014 | ON | Implement | QUAL | Semi-structured group and individual interviews | Central players in development and implementation of DPA (n = 10) | Factors influencing development and implementation, roles of key players, barriers, and current status of DPA | Issues of flexibility and accountability; several relationships to assist with implementation; barriers of tight timeline, lack of support, insufficient training, lack of facilities, space and equipment, poor weather, increased teacher burden, lack of accountability; inconsistent implementation and lack of evaluation plan |
Gilmore and Donohoe, 2016 | ON | Implement | QUANT | Survey | Teachers (n = 136) | Implementation status; perceived competence, motivation and skills to deliver DPA | 46% of teachers reported that DPA is not being delivered; majority of teachers lack competence, motivation and skills to deliver DPA |
Stone et al. 2012 | ON | Combination | QUANT | Accelerometer and classroom schedules | Students (n = 856) | Total PA, frequency of DPA schedule, and quality, number and duration of sustained bouts of MVPA (≥5 min), BMI | Less than 50% get DPA every day, but for those that do they are more active, more likely to meet guidelines and less likely to be overweight; no child engaged in sustained MVPA for ≥20 min |
Hobin et al. 2010 | ON | Combination | QUANT | Survey | Students (n = 2379) and school administrators (n = 30) | Student-level (sex, grade, #PE classes/week, MVPA minutes) and school-level (intramurals and interschool programs, DPA implementation model) characteristics | 70% of schools offered DPA only on days without PE; student PA levels were associated with PE frequency but not DPA implementation model |
Kennedy et al. 2010 | AB | Implement | MIXED | Interview or survey | Principals/vice-principals (n = 55) and PE teachers (n = 7) | DPA knowledge, % implementation, approaches, barriers | 100% principals and teachers reported full implementation; 80% of schools provided daily PE |
Alberta Education, 2008 | AB | Implement | MIXED | Survey | Principals (n = 387) and teachers (n = 638) | Resources and supports for DPA, PE, DPA activities, attitudes, challenges, monitoring status | Positive perceptions of DPA, higher for principals; multiple approaches for implementation and challenges (scheduling, lack of facilities/space); 60% of principals monitor DPA |
Watts et al. 2014a
| BC | Implement | QUANT | Survey | Principals (n = 351) | Environment changes; minutes of PE per week and delivery method of PE | ≥150 min PE/week increased from 34.1 to 48.1% before and after implementation |
Mâsse et al. 2013 | BC | Implement | QUAL | Semi-structured Interviews | Principals (n = 17) and teachers (n = 33) | Perceived implementation, styles/change, factors that impeded or facilitated implementation of DPA | Perceived implementation varies between principals and teachers; prescriptive vs. non-prescriptive approach; major themes: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, observability, facilitators (contextual factors) |
Study quality
Barrier and facilitator extraction and coding reliability
Round | % total (n observations) | Mean percent positive agreement (n observationsa) | Mean Kappa (±SD) | Mean PABAK (±SD) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Round 1 | 9.85 (20) | 70.0 (20) | 0.66 ± 0.50 | 0.90 ± 0.15 |
Round 2 | 11.8 (24) | 88.5 (26) | 0.90 ± 0.25 | 0.97 ± 0.08 |
Round 3 | 12.8 (26) | 71.0 (31) | 0.79 ± 0.41 | 0.94 ± 0.12 |
Round 4 | 19.7 (40) | 76.2 (42) | 0.74 ± 0.44 | 0.92 ± 0.12 |
Round 5 | 14.8 (30) | 84.2 (38) | 0.85 ± 0.35 | 0.94 ± 0.12 |
Round 6 | 16.3 (33) | 77.5 (40) | 0.83 ± 0.34 | 0.94 ± 0.11 |
Round 7 | 14.8 (30) | 84.8 (33) | 0.90 ± 0.29 | 0.97 ± 0.09 |
Implementation status
Implementation approaches
Identified barriers and facilitators
Paper (author, year) | Province | Participants | Method | Scale | Theory | Total BFs identified (n) | TDF barriers (n) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mâsse et al. 2013 | BC | Principals and teachers | Interviews | N/A | DOI | 24 | ECR (9) Beliefs about consequences (4) SPRI (3) Social influences (2) Skills (2) Beliefs about capabilities (2) Knowledge (2) | Theory was used to arrange study findings, but did not guide interview. |
Kennedy et al. 2010 | AB | Principals, vice-principals, and PE teachers | Survey | Check all that apply | N/A | 12 | ECR (8) Social influences (4) Skills (1) Knowledge (1) | The survey contained preset answers; participants were allowed to give more than one answer. Frequencies (%) were reported, and factors were extracted if at least 50% of the respondents checked that the barrier was present. |
Strampel et al. 2014 | ON | Teachers | Survey | Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) | N/A | 13 | ECR (8) Social influences (3) Beliefs about capabilities (1) SPRI (1) Skills (1) Knowledge (1) | Frequencies, means and standard deviations were reported. Extraction and coding was based off frequencies. The middle anchor was “neither agree nor disagree” and any responses for this option were not included in determining if the factor was extracted. Some items were reverse scored, and therefore, these were accounted for in item extraction. All open-ended responses were extracted. |
Patton, 2012 | ON | Teachers | Survey | Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = always) | N/A | 14 | Beliefs about consequences (6) ECR (4) Social Influences (2) Emotion (1) Reinforcement (1) Intentions (1) | Only extracted barriers that at least 50% of respondents believed sometimes, often, or always influenced delivery of DPA. |
Allison et al. 2014 | ON | Key informants (involved in initial development and implementation of DPA) | Interviews | N/A | N/A | 24 | ECR (13) Beliefs about consequences (3) Skills (3) Knowledge (3) Reinforcement (3) SPRI (2) Social Influences (2) Intentions (1) Beliefs about capabilities (1) | |
Brown and Elliot, 2015 | ON | Teachers and principals | Interviews | N/A | SET and ANGELO | 61 | ECR (22) Beliefs about consequences (13) Social Influences (13) Skills (6) Reinforcement (5) Intentions (3) Beliefs about capabilities (3) Knowledge (3) SPRI (1) Behavioral regulation (1) | |
Rickwood, 2015 | ON | Teachers and administrators | Interviews | N/A | CST | 15 | ECR (5) Beliefs about consequences (4) Social influences (3) Intentions (1) Beliefs about capabilities (1) SPRI (1) | Participants discussed barriers more in relation to PE, coaching, and overall general PA; not always DPA-specific. However, DPA policies do include PE as a method to meet DPA guidelines, and therefore, all reported barriers and facilitators were extracted. |
Alberta Education, 2008 | AB | Principals and teachers | Survey | Likert scale (1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree) | N/A | 33 | ECR (13) Beliefs about consequences (11) Social influences (7) Beliefs about capabilities (2) Skills (1) Knowledge (2) SPRI (1) | Only extracted barriers that received at least 50% agreement (somewhat agree, strongly agree). The middle anchor was “neither agree nor disagree” and any responses for this option were not included in determining if the factor was extracted. Principals reported less challenges associated with DPA implementation and perceived more positive outcomes than teachers. Despite this difference, the same extraction criteria applied irrespective of whether it was the teachers or principals agreeing/disagreeing that the factor was present. |
Auditor General’s Office, 2013 | ON | School boards (principals and teachers) | Surveys, interviews, document review | Not reported | N/A | 3 | ECR (3) | Survey question type was not reported. Descriptive results were presented on the most influential barriers. These factors were extracted. |
Gilmore and Donohoe, 2016 | ON | Teachers | Survey | Likert scale (7-pt scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree; anchors not provided) | FMST | 4 | Skills (2) ECR (1) Knowledge (1) Beliefs about capabilities (1) Intentions (1) | Only extracted barriers that received at least 50% agreement (agree, strongly agree). The middle anchor was “neither agree nor disagree” and any responses for this option were not included in determining if the factor was extracted. |