Abstract
Citation
Jones NR, Jones A, van Sluijs EM, Panter J, Harrison F, Griffin SJ. School environments and physical activity: The development and testing of an audit tool. Health Place 2010 Sep;16(5):776-83. Epub 2010 Apr 14.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop, test, and employ an audit tool to objectively assess the opportunities for physical activity within school environments. A 44 item tool was developed and tested at 92 primary schools in the county of Norfolk, England, during summer term of 2007. Scores from the tool covering 6 domains of facility provision were examined against objectively measured hourly moderate to vigorous physical activity levels in 1868 9-10 year old pupils attending the schools. The tool was found to have acceptable reliability and good construct validity, differentiating the physical activity levels of children attending the highest and lowest scoring schools. The characteristics of school grounds may influence pupil's physical activity levels.
Full Text
The full text is available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.04.002
At A Glance
Physical Activity Environment Variables
| # | Type of Environment/Location |
|---|---|
| 92 | Parks/Playgrounds |
| 92 | School |
| # | Scale |
|---|---|
| - | Equipment |
| - | Trail/path/corridor |
| - | Bus stops |
| Measure | objective | perceived |
|---|---|---|
| Street Connectivity | ✔ | ✘ |
| Pedestrian/Traffic Safety | ✔ | ✘ |
| Cycling Infrastructure | ✔ | ✘ |
| Facility Adequacy/Appeal or Quality | ✔ | ✘ |
| Facility Access/Availablity/Proximity | ✔ | ✘ |
| Aesthetics/Beautification | ✔ | ✘ |
| Land Use | ✔ | ✘ |
| Pedestrian Infrastructure | ✔ | ✘ |
| Social Environment | ✔ | ✘ |
| Open Space/Greenness | ✔ | ✘ |
Domain(s)
Physical Activity Environment
Measure Type
Audit tool
Measure Availability
Measure included in article
Number of Items
44 Reported
Study location
Metro/Urban, Small Town/Rural
Norfolk, England
Languages
English
Information about Development of Measure
The audit tool was partly based upon a tool previously developed to examine the quality of urban green spaces, and was adapted to be appropriate to the school setting. Additional components were added, some taken from an existing preschool playground audit. Three experts commented on the tool, after which it was amended to clarify the definitions of some items.The final version was piloted in two schools.
Study Design
Study Participants
Age
6 - 11 Years
Sex
Female
Male
Race/Ethnicity
Not reported
Predominantly Low-income/Low-SES
Not reported
Sample Size
1868
Study Design
Design Type
Validation/Reliability
Health Outcomes Assessed
None
Obesity Measures
Not reported
BMI Measured or Self-reported
Not reported
Covariates
Not available
Data Reported on Race/Ethnicity
Not applicable
Data Reported on SES
Not applicable
SES-related Variables
Not applicable
How To Use
Administration
Who Administered
Researcher-administered
How Administered
In-person
Direct observation, hard-copy form
Time Required
Not reported
Training Required
Yes, time reported: 8 hours
Instructions on Use
Instructions on instrument use included in article
Data Analysis
Data Collection/Analysis Costs
Not reported
Data Collection/Protocol
The audit tool was completed over a six month period by a team of five auditors. To assess inter-rater reliability, repeat full audits were undertaken at seventeen schools. Eleven schools were audited by two auditors; four schools were assessed by four auditors and the remaining two schools by all five auditors. During the summer term, children were provided an ActiGraph activity monitor and instructed to wear it continuously for one week.
Instructions on Data Analysis
Instructions on analysis included in article
Validity (1)
| Type of validity | Construct/subscale assessed | Criterion measure used | Test/statistic used | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Construct | Audit component scores, lowest vs highest quintiles | Actigrah accelerometer, moderate to vigorous physical activity, minutes | Independent samples t-test | p = 0.926 to < 0.001 |
Reliability (7)
| Type of reliability | Construct/subscale assessed | Test/statistic used | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (physical activity score) | Kappa score (k) | k = 0 to 0.86 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (aesthetics items) | Kappa score (k) | k = -0.67 to 0.62 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (design of the school grounds items) | Kappa score (k) | k = -0.22 to 0.56 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (other facility provision items) | Kappa score (k) | k = -0.33 to 0.82 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (sports and play facility provision items) | Kappa score (k) | k = 0.24 to 0.89 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (cycling provision items) | Kappa score (k) | k = 0 to 0.90 |
| Inter-rater | Audit tool (walking provision items) | Kappa score (k) | k = 0 to 0.88 |