Background
Methods
Step 1 - Research scoping
Step 2 - Data collection
Chief investigator and end-user interviews
Bibliometric and document analysis
Step 3 - Data analysis
Results
Participant characteristics
Participant | Participant sector and role | Survey | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
1997 | 2004 | 2010 | ||
CI 1 | Academic researcher | ✓ | ✓ | |
CI 2 | Academic researcher | ✓ | ||
CI 3 | Academic researcher | ✓ | ||
EU 1 | Health1,2,3,4
| ✓ | ✓ | |
EU 2 | Community sport and recreation2,3,4
| ✓ | ✓ | |
EU 3 | Education3,4
| ✓ | ✓ | |
EU 4 | Education4
| ✓ | ||
EU 5 | Education4
| ✓ | ||
EU 6 | Health1,2,3,4
| ✓ | ||
EU 7 | Health4
| ✓ | ||
EU 8 | Health4
| ✓ | ||
EU 9 | Health1,2,3,4
| ✓ | ||
Total number of interviews
|
12
|
2
|
7
|
7
|
CI interviews: 3
| (1 CI
| (2 CIs
| (1 CI
| |
EU interviews: 9
|
1 EU) |
5 EUs) |
6 EUs) |
Key Findings | Key Findings | Dissemination Process | Funding Source |
---|---|---|---|
1997 School Fitness and Physical Activity Survey
| |||
Poor fundamental movement skills (FMS) amongst school students | Need to address FMS and physical activity in schools | Main and summary report available on website | Department of Education and Training |
Low levels of physical activity, particularly amongst adolescent girls | Survey should be repeated periodically with comparable measures | Summary report sent to all NSW schools | |
Few primary schools have teachers with training in sport and physical education | Presentations to a range of end-user groups | ||
Peer review publications (n = 11, total citations1 = 589) | |||
2004 School Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey
| |||
Almost 25% of students 5–16 years were overweight or obese, rising from 1997 | Focus on FMS working, but needs to be continued | Main, short and summary report available on website | NSW Department of Health |
Widening of the gap in prevalence of overweight and obesity amongst low socio-economic status and culturally and linguistically diverse groups since 1997 | Need to limit small screen use to 2 hours per day | 40 Regional stakeholder workshops across NSW | |
FMS and physical activity levels had improved significantly since 1997 survey but high screen time use | Reinforced the need to implement government policy that schools should offer 2 hours of planned physical activity per week | Media releases and interviews | |
Chronic disease risk factors common amongst overweigh/obese adolescents | Efforts to increase physical activity promotion in schools and community should be continued and increased | Peer review publications (n = 18, total citations1 = 131) | |
High intake of energy dense foods and drinks and low levels of vegetable consumption | Limit consumption and promotion of energy dense nutrient poor food | ||
Implement strategies to target ‘high-risk’ groups | |||
2010 School Physical Activity and Nutrition Survey
| |||
Prevalence of overweight and obesity stabilized since 2004 | Continue to implement school canteen program, focus on FMS and provide minimum of 2 hours of planned physical activity per week in schools | Main, short and summary report available on website | NSW Department of Health (now Ministry of Health) |
Socioeconomic and cultural disparities in prevalence of overweight/obesity remain. | Implement programs to support participation in community sport | Media releases and interviews | |
High consumption of energy dense nutrient poor foods and drinks and low levels of vegetable consumption | Advocate for national regulations to limit the marketing of unhealthy foods to children and policies to promote active transport | Peer review publications (n = 4, total citations1 = 1) | |
Decline in proportion of students meeting physical activity guidelines | Widespread dissemination of consistent messages to parents/families regarding healthy lifestyle behaviors | Presentations to stakeholder groups (with more to follow) | |
FMS showed improvement in some skills and decline in others | Importance of targeting family behaviors and early childhood sector to reduce obesity in preschoolers | ||
High screen time use | |||
Overweight and obesity increasing among children entering first year of school (~ 5 years old) |
Research impacts
Dissemination and advancing knowledge
Capacity building impacts
Policy and practice impacts
Key Impacts | Illustrative Quotes |
---|---|
Policy Impacts
| |
· Agenda and priority setting e.g., attracting funding to the issue of child obesity prevention, identifying priority groups and settings for intervention | “I guess it sort of drives, to some degree, the priorities in the [government obesity] plan.. are the actions in the plan the right ones, are they working?…So it gives us a bit of …an idea of whether or not there’s gaps that haven’t been addressed, in terms of the broader cross government strategy.. are there areas where we could pull back on, invest more, focus in another area.” (EU9, 2010 survey) |
· Informed policy debates e.g., data used in briefings with health minister to inform parliamentary debates | |
· Informed policy planning e.g., identifying areas for investment, de-investment and stakeholder involvement in government obesity plan | “….there’s high levels of screen time, so I guess we can kind of use it as a basis or rationale for our policy input, and also for how we approach different issues with different government agencies.” (EU9, 2010 survey) |
· Directly underpinned new policy e.g., banning soft drink sales in schools | |
“I know that the physical activity components [1997 survey] were also used to advocate for fundamental movement skill development with the Department of Education.” (EU1, 1997 & 2004 surveys) | |
· Indirectly used to advocate for new policy e.g., food marketing to children | |
“SPANS would certainly have been one of the things that contributed to the development of that policy [nutrition in schools].” (EU5, 2010 survey) | |
· Used to support existing policy e.g., after school physical activity programs for children | |
“the stats that are so terribly important, particularly when you’re trying to sell something” (EU4, 2010 survey) | |
· Policy evaluation e.g., performance monitoring tool for government obesity plan |
“And the Education Department was particularly interested to see what had happened in terms of fundamental movement skills, because they’d made a significant investment in fundamental movement skill education in primary and high schools, so they were really interested in what had happened there. And another part of it was an evaluation of the Healthy Canteen strategy that had been put in place, maybe a year or two earlier. And there was also an aspect of the study that was looking at the school environment to see again if there had been any changes following the previous study.” (CI3, 2004 survey) |
“SPANS just shines a light on what’s not working.” (EU2, 2004 & 2010 surveys) | |
Practice Impacts
| |
School Sector
| “…the initial research that was done [1997 survey]…we got very strong agreement around those fundamental movement skills, and we had some clear support materials developed for schools and the Get Skilled Get Active DVD, which is a resource that we still promote in schools.” (EU3, 2004 & 2010 surveys) |
· Informed curriculum development e.g., standardized approach to teaching FMS | |
· Lead to new curriculum resources e.g., standardized teaching materials for FMS | |
· Informed Professional development for teachers e.g., measuring FMS, raising awareness of child obesity | |
· Informed and supported existing health promotion programs e.g., healthy canteens | |
Sport and Recreation Sector
| “…the [sport] development officer network, they loved it [survey data] and they got it. Particularly the fundamental movement skills, because they’re out there teaching them, through sport, every day… they’ve now rescheduled their format of how they go in to teach girls Rugby …they do the kicking last because they know their stronger skill is in the running and the catching. So, it’s really practical…” (EU2, 2004 & 2010 surveys) |
· Informed sports coaching programs e.g., how FMS are taught in some sports | |
· Supported rationale for new programs or pilots e.g., healthy sports canteens | |
Cross Government / Community Sector
| “…when it [2004 survey] showed that 20% of kids when they started grade 1 were already fat, it also gave emphasis to do stuff in childcare…that was really compelling…we would have never known that if that survey wasn’t done.” (EU6, 2004 survey) |
· Informed development and refinement of educational resources e.g., website on healthy living for parents and general community [35] | |
“SPANS, as I said, is a moment in time that gives you the heads-up on what areas you should be focusing on in you next plan; that’s what it should be doing.” (EU2, 2004 & 2010 surveys) | |
Health Sector
| “I think SPANS contributed to having treatment programs is what they are – I call them treatment programs for people with already – with – with already with the problem.” (EU6, 2004) |
· Informed program planning e.g., choice of target groups and settings for intervention and availability of treatment programs |
Broader health, economic and societal impacts
Factors influencing the use of SPANS findings to inform policy and practice
Facilitators | Barriers |
---|---|
Research Quality and Content
| |
· Survey program perceived to be of high methodological quality: longitudinal and conducted by an independent and credible research team | · Survey findings did not provide all the answers: needed to be considered alongside evidence about effective interventions |
“…of course just monitoring is not a solution” (EU6, 2004) | |
· Survey program perceived to be aligned to the priorities of policy makers and practitioners with adaptations made over time to meet needs |
Lack of specificity of the data: Unable to provide data at regional/sector level |
“I think SPANS cannot stand alone, it has to have an evidence summary of interventions behind it to inform good policy” (EU2, SPANS 2004 & 2010) | |
“the Ministry/Department has worked really hard…to make sure that…the questions that the survey’s asking are, I suppose, the right ones for the priority areas as well…So I think over time the surveys have kind of adapted to have different kinds of questions in them…it’s been purposefully closely aligned with policy priorities and government priorities and I think that helps” (EU9, 2010 survey) | |
Dissemination Process
| |
· Use of active dissemination strategies e.g., discussion of findings at workshops between researchers and end-users. |
Lack of reports tailored to specific end-user groups/sectors highlighting key implications of the findings |
“… there was a major dissemination strategy amongst a set of orgs” (EU6, 2004) | |
“…there probably should be a report for practitioners … What does this mean to you?”… | |
· A range of ‘knowledge transfer’ products produced e.g., short reports highlighting key findings and recommendations. |
What does it mean for a teacher who’s 55, has never played sport before..I think if we really want to get good at this, take SPANS and write it for different audiences… So SPANS for academia, SPANS for policy, SPANS for the general public” (EU2, 2004 & 2010 surveys) |
· End-users acted as ‘knowledge brokers’ facilitating dissemination of SPANS findings within their sector | |
“….we’ve done canteen newsletters and things like that and we’ve reported SPANS results and we reference it there” (EU5, 2010) | |
· Active engagement of the media resulting in high levels of media coverage, public debate and discussion | |
“I also sit on the [policy] group for obesity, so the report was discussed on a number of occasions at that meeting as well. You see the media reports they’ve generated…we receive…draft copies of the report as well, in terms of the discussions that we had with Health” (EU5, 2010 survey) | |
Contextual Issues
| |
· Supportive policy context for addressing child obesity with the release of the SPANS findings fitting well with some policy cycles (government obesity plan and planning of national curriculum) |
Political instability and poor timing e.g., frequent changes in ministerial positions and poor fit with some policy cycles |
Limited sector capacity and resources e.g., lack of funds to implement the findings in some sectors at certain time points | |
· Continuity and Partnerships between researchers and end-users from the inception of SPANS program facilitated dissemination, ownership and use of the findings | |
“….then there’s some infrastructure issues we need to look at; there needs to be some resourcing” (EU2, 2004 & 2010 surveys) | |
· Mechanisms and structures in place to implement recommendations e.g., Policy relevant forums involving key end-users | “…probably prior to 2002 …there was a relatively limited amount of funding in this aspect of Health Promotion - …So in terms of influencing programs it would have been difficult ‘cause we’ve …no money to include programs” (EU1, 1997 & 2004 surveys) |
· Good fit with organizational culture and ways of working e.g., value placed on having an ‘evidence base’ for practice and policy decisions amongst end-user groups | |
“I think the Department of Education knew of the findings or the recommendations that were going to be made because they also had ownership of those..they had to agree on those for the draft report. So I think by that stage they’d already said: We want this recommendation here and this is how we’re going to respond to it.” (CI, 1997 & 2004 surveys) |