Article

The association of school environments with youth physical activity

Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, 6363 Alvarado Court, #103, San Diego, CA 92120, USA.
American Journal of Public Health (Impact Factor: 4.23). 05/2001; 91(4):618-20. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.91.4.618
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study assessed the association of school environmental characteristics with student physical activity on campus.
Physical activity areas (n = 137) at 24 public middle schools were assessed for area type, size, and improvements (e.g., basketball courts). Student physical activity and the presence of equipment and supervision were directly observed before school, after lunch, and after school.
Environmental characteristics explained 42% of the variance in the proportion of girls who were physically active and 59% of the variance for boys.
School environments with high levels of supervision and improvements stimulated girls and boys to be more physically active.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Judith J Prochaska, Jul 07, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
127 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose. The aim of this study was to examine (a) whether distance from home to school is a determinant of active commuting to school (ACS), (b) the relationship between distance from home to heavily used facilities (school, green spaces, and sports facilities) and the weight status and cardiometabolic risk categories, and (c) whether ACS has a positive impact on schoolchildren's health. Method. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 956 schoolchildren aged 10 to 12 years from the province of Cuenca, Spain. Height, weight, fat mass, waist circumference, blood pressure, fasting plasma lipid profile, insulin, fitness, physical activity, and ACS were measured. Distances from home to facilities were measured by a geographic information system, and a validated metabolic syndrome index was used. Findings. Children living closer to school (less than 600 m) commuted actively to school more frequently than children living further away (more than 800 m). Normoweight boys lived further away from sports facilities than overweight/obese peers, and children presenting higher cardiometabolic risk levels lived closer to school than those who did not. No differences were found between children who daily walked/cycled to school and those commuting actively to school less frequently in body mass index, metabolic syndrome index, fitness, and physical activity. Conclusions. ACS had no positive impact on schoolchildren's health. Distance to school is an indicator of active commuting. However, it seems that not enough physical activity is done to prevent obesity and cardiometabolic risk factors in rural areas.
    Health Education &amp Behavior 09/2014; DOI:10.1177/1090198114549373 · 1.54 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Disadvantaged rural youth may be especially at risk for obesity and poorer health due to physical inactivity. Research suggests that extracurricular school programs can increase physical activity for this population. This study sought to determine whether local differences existed in the availability of supportive environments for extracurricular physical activity in North Carolina middle schools. Multiple data sources, including a self-administered questionnaire to personnel at 325 schools were integrated. Multilevel models were estimated using a composite index for supportive environments as the dependent variable and school compositional factors, economic resources, and community social factors as explanatory variables. Study findings suggested adolescents living in socioeconomically deprived rural areas had fewer environmental resources for extracurricular physical activity. Rural schools in poor areas of the state with high racial heterogeneity demonstrated the lowest environmental support. Reduced availability of supportive school environments may be one factor contributing to physical inactivity in the state.
    Youth &amp Society 10/2013; 45(2). DOI:10.1177/0044118X11416677 · 1.82 Impact Factor
  • Source