Wearable activity trackers (wearables) embed numerous behaviour change techniques (BCTs) that have previously been shown to increase adult physical activity (PA). With few children and adolescents achieving PA guidelines, it is crucial to explore ways to increase their PA. This systematic review examined the acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness of wearables and their potential mechanisms of action for increasing PA in 5 to 19-year-olds. A systematic search of six databases was conducted, including data from the start date of each database to December 2019 (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020164506). Thirty-three studies were included. Most studies (70%) included only adolescents (10 to 19 years). There was some—but largely mixed—evidence that wearables increase steps and moderate-to-vigorous-intensity PA and reduce sedentary behaviour. There were no apparent differences in effectiveness based on the number of BCTs used and between studies using a wearable alone or as part of a multi-component intervention. Qualitative findings suggested wearables increased motivation to be physically active via self-monitoring, goal setting, feedback, and competition. However, children and adolescents reported technical difficulties and a novelty effect when using wearables, which may impact wearables’ long-term use. More rigorous and long-term studies investigating the acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness of wearables in 5 to 19-year-olds are warranted.

Background: The family environment plays a crucial role in child physical activity (PA). Wearable activity trackers (wearables) show potential for increasing children’s PA; however, few studies have explored families’ acceptance of wearables. This study investigated the acceptability of using wearables in a family setting, aligning experiences with components of the Technology Acceptance Model and Theoretical Domains Framework. Methods: Twenty-four families, with children aged 5–9 years, took part in a 5-week study, where all members were provided with a Fitbit Alta HR for 4 weeks. Acceptability was measured using weekly surveys and pre-post-questionnaires. Nineteen families participated in a focus group. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated using the Pillar Integration Process technique. Results: Pillars reflected (1) external variables impacting wearable use and PA and (2) wearable use, (3) ease of use, (4) usefulness for increasing PA and other health outcomes, (5) attitudes, and (6) intention to use a wearable, including future intervention suggestions. Conclusions: Families found the Fitbit easy to use and acceptable, but use varied, and perceived impact on PA were mixed, with external variables contributing towards this. This study provides insights into how wearables may be integrated into family-based PA interventions and highlights barriers and facilitators of family wearable use.

Background: The school environment is an ideal setting for promoting physical activity (PA). Wearable activity trackers (wearables) have previously been implemented, in research, as intervention tools within the school-environment. However, the large-scale use and acceptance of wearables, in schools, is unknown. Methods: This study distributed a cross-sectional survey to school staff to investigate the prevalence of child and adolescent wearable use in schools, including when and how they are used, and school staff’s willingness to use them in the future (as implemented by school staff). This survey consisted of between 13 and 22 items, including closed-ended and open-ended questions. Closed-ended responses were displayed descriptively (wearable prevalence and characteristics), and open-ended qualitative responses were categorised using descriptive content analysis (how wearables are used). Results: 1087 school staff provided valid responses. Of those, 896 (82.4%) had never used a wearable as a teaching or support tool for their students, and 120 (11%) currently used- and 71 (6.5%) had previously used- a wearable as a teaching or support tool for their students. When wearables were used, school staff implemented their use regularly and during physical education lessons or throughout the entire school day. Wearables were used to monitor or increase student’s PA levels, or for student and staff educational purposes (e.g., academic learning, movement breaks). Most school staff were willing to use a wearable as a teaching or support tool to promote student’s PA, and/or learning about PA, in the future. Conclusions: This study is the first study to explore the widescale use and acceptance of children and adolescents using wearables in the school-setting. Findings may inform the development of future school-based interventions and public health initiatives for physical activity promotion, using wearables.

Previous research has explored the effectiveness of wearable activity trackers (wearables) for increasing child physical activity (PA) levels, but there have been mixed results. The use of theoretical frameworks and co-design techniques are recognised ways of increasing an intervention's acceptability and effectiveness. This study aims to use co-design workshops and an evidence-based theoretical framework (the Behaviour Change Wheel) to develop a family-based PA intervention using wearables. Three stages of intervention development outlined by the Behaviour Change Wheel were used. Co-design workshops with seven families (11 parents and 12 children) and seven PA experts were conducted where stakeholders discussed how to overcome previously identified barriers to families being active and using wearables. This resulted in the intervention's components being developed, with each component's mechanisms of action (e.g. intervention functions and behaviour change techniques) being retrospectively identified. The 'Move & Connect' intervention was developed, which targets family PA and wearable use. The intervention takes a flexible approach and includes eight components, including wearable devices (Fitbit Alta HR), support resources, an introductory workshop, collective challenges, goal setting and reviewing, engagement prompts, social support and health-related resources (e.g. educational videos). The intervention incorporates six intervention functions targeting PA and wearable use: education, training, modelling, persuasion, incentivisation and environmental restructuring and 24 behaviour change techniques, including goal setting, social comparison, feedback on behaviour and graded task. This is the first known study to use an evidence-based framework and co-design to develop a family-based wearable intervention. The identification of the intervention's mechanisms of action will prove useful when implementing and evaluating the 'Move & Connect' intervention and allow researchers to replicate its components.

Background and purpose: Increased time at home during the COVID-19 pandemic significantly decreased children’s physical activity. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of children’s home-based physical activity interventions, and identify ‘active ingredients’ underpinning these. Methods: Databases searched—AMED, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science, from inception until June 2022. Eligibility criteria–children aged 2–16 years, targeting home-based physical activity, a control group, and physical activity measured pre- and post- intervention. Studies were excluded if it was not possible to identify change in physical activity at home. The review was written following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. Study quality was evaluated using the quality assessment tool for quantitative studies. Study design, intervention characteristics, outcome data, behavior change theory, Behavior Change Techniques (BCTs) and process evaluation data were extracted and discussed using narrative syntheses. Results: 13 studies (including 1,182 participants) from 25,967 were included. Interventions primarily involved active video games, with the addition of coaching or telehealth support (n = 5). Three of the 13 studies significantly increased children’s physical activity (1 = Moderate to vigorous physical activity, 2 = total volume, P<0.05). The largest effect size (d = 3.45) was for moderate to vigorous physical activity. 29% of BCTs were identified across included interventions; the most common being adding objects to the environment. The most effective intervention scored strong for design quality, incorporated telehealth coaching, and included the most commonly coded BCTs. Variation among studies and insufficient reporting of data made a meta-analysis unfeasible. Conclusion: COVID-19 emphasized the importance of the home for physical activity. Whilst effectiveness of interventions was limited, building social support and self-efficacy are mechanisms that should be explored further. The review provides recommendations to improve the design and evaluation of future interventions. Trial registration: Prospero registration number: CRD42020193110.

Introduction: Living in an area with high levels of child poverty predisposes children to poorer mental and physical health. ActEarly is a 5-year research programme that comprises a large number of interventions (>20) with citizen science and co-production embedded. It aims to improve the health and well-being of children and families living in two areas of the UK with high levels of deprivation; Bradford in West Yorkshire, and the London Borough of Tower Hamlets. This protocol outlines the meta-evaluation (an evaluation of evaluations) of the ActEarly programme from a systems perspective, where individual interventions are viewed as events in the wider policy system across the two geographical areas. It includes investigating the programme’s impact on early life health and well-being outcomes, interdisciplinary prevention research collaboration and capacity building, and local and national decision making. Methods: The ActEarly meta-evaluation will follow and adapt the five iterative stages of the ‘Evaluation of Programmes in Complex Adaptive Systems’ (ENCOMPASS) framework for evaluation of public health programmes in complex adaptive systems. Theory-based and mixed-methods approaches will be used to investigate the fidelity of the ActEarly research programme, and whether, why and how ActEarly contributes to changes in the policy system, and whether alternative explanations can be ruled out. Ripple effects and systems mapping will be used to explore the relationships between interventions and their outcomes, and the degree to which the ActEarly programme encouraged interdisciplinary and prevention research collaboration as intended. A computer simulation model (“LifeSim”) will also be used to evaluate the scale of the potential long-term benefits of cross-sectoral action to tackle the financial, educational and health disadvantages faced by children in Bradford and Tower Hamlets. Together, these approaches will be used to evaluate ActEarly’s dynamic programme outputs at different system levels and measure the programme’s system changes on early life health and well-being. Discussion: This meta-evaluation protocol presents our plans for using and adapting the ENCOMPASS framework to evaluate the system-wide impact of the early life health and well-being programme, ActEarly. Due to the collaborative and non-linear nature of the work, we reserve the option to change and query some of our evaluation choices based on the feedback we receive from stakeholders to ensure that our evaluation remains relevant and fit for purpose.