Background: Multiple models and frameworks exist for the measurement and classification of physical activity in adults that are applied broadly across populations but have limitations when applied to youth. The authors propose a conceptual framework specifically designed for classifying youth physical activity. Methods: The Youth Physical Activity Timing, How, and Setting (Y-PATHS) framework is a conceptualization of the when (timing), how, and where (setting) of children’s and adolescents’ physical activity patterns. The authors developed Y-PATHS using the design thinking process, which includes 3 stages: inspiration, ideation, and implementation. Results: The Y-PATHS includes 3 major components (timing, how, and setting) and 13 subcomponents. Timing subcomponents include (1) school days: in-school, (2) school days: out-of-school, and (3) nonschool days. How subcomponents include: (1) functional, (2) transportation, (3) organized, and (4) free play. Setting subcomponents include: (1) natural areas, (2) schools, (3) home, (4) recreational facilities, (5) shops and services, and (6) travel infrastructure. Conclusions: The Y-PATHS is a comprehensive classification framework that can help researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to better understand youth physical activity. Specifically, Y-PATHS can help to identify the domains of youth physical activity for surveillance and research and to inform the planning/evaluation of more comprehensive physical activity programming.

Background: There is a need to understand how schools adopt physical activity approaches (curricula, programs and practices), but few studies report on this process. Purpose: To obtain elementary school staff’s perspectives regarding how their schools are currently adopting physical activity approaches. Methods: We recruited 15 participants from four job types in an urban Texas school district to participate in semi-structured interviews. We coded and analyzed interviews using directed content analysis and iterative categorization. Results: We identified four themes pertaining to how the district, schools, and teachers contribute to the adoption of approaches. Themes included: (1) Staff identify new approaches through numerous channels; (2) Adoption occurs at multiple organizational levels; (3) District staff fulfilled a supporting role in the adoption process; and (4) School staff’s perceptions of approach characteristics influence adoption. Discussion: We found that schools adopt physical activity approaches at both the district- and school-level. Additionally, multiple stakeholders played a role in the adoption process and those roles varied across approaches. Translation to Health Education Practice: Time, money, space, staff, competing priorities, limited information, the school’s mission, and the benefits an approach provides to children are factors that researchers and practitioners should consider when starting a new physical activity approach.

The Multiphase Optimization STrategy (MOST) is a framework that uses three phases—preparation, optimization, and evaluation—to develop multicomponent interventions that achieve intervention EASE by strategically balancing Effectiveness, Affordability, Scalability, and Efficiency. In implementation science, optimization of the intervention requires focus on the implementation strategies—things that we do to deliver the intervention—and implementation outcomes. MOST has been primarily used to optimize the components of the intervention related to behavioral or health outcomes. However, innovative opportunities to optimize discrete (i.e. single strategy) and multifaceted (i.e. multiple strategies) implementation strategies exist and can be done independently, or in conjunction with, intervention optimization. This article details four scenarios where the MOST framework and the factorial design can be used in the optimization of implementation strategies: (i) the development of new multifaceted implementation strategies; (ii) evaluating interactions between program components and a discrete or multifaceted implementation strategies; (iii) evaluating the independent effects of several discrete strategies that have been previously evaluated as a multifaceted implementation strategy; and (iv) modification of a discrete or multifaceted implementation strategy for the local context. We supply hypothetical school-based physical activity examples to illustrate these four scenarios, and we provide hypothetical data that can help readers make informed decisions derived from their trial data. This manuscript offers a blueprint for implementation scientists such that not only is the field using MOST to optimize the effectiveness of an intervention on a behavioral or health outcome, but also that the implementation of that intervention is optimized. The Multiphase Optimization STrategy (MOST) is a method used to create interventions that work well, are cost-effective, and can be used widely. Normally, MOST focuses on making interventions better at improving health or behaviors. This article demonstrates that MOST can also improve how interventions are implemented and provide four examples: (i) the development of a new multipart implementation plan; (ii) evaluating how different parts of an intervention and its implementation plan work together; (iii) evaluating how different parts of a multipart implementation plan work alone and in combination; and (iv) modification of an implementation plan for local context. This article is meant to help scientists who work on putting interventions into practice. It shows how MOST can make interventions better and make sure they are used well in different places. By focusing on both the intervention and the implementation plan, we can do a better job of using interventions that have been proven to work in real life.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the literature on early care and education center (ECEC)-based physical activity interventions to identify ecologic environmental factors that improve cardiovascular fitness (CVF) in preschool-aged children. Data sources included PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library Trials, CINHAL, Science Direct, PsychINFO and SPORTDiscus. Peer-reviewed publications of studies that met the following criteria were eligible for inclusion: (1) mean age of participants between two and a half and five and a half years old enrolled in a pre-primary school; (2) randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental interventions with a control group; (3) interventions occurring before, during, or immediately after school; (4) use of an objective measure or field-based estimate of CVF; (5) enrolled apparently healthy children. In June of 2018, titles (n = 1197) were reviewed for inclusion into the study and 74 abstracts/full texts were assessed for eligibility. Ten articles met all eligibility criteria and were included in the final review. A random effects meta-analysis suggested a moderate-to-large effect size for ECEC-based interventions to increase CVF (g = 0.75; 95%CI [0.40-1.11]). Interventions that included three or more ecologic environments (g = 0.79 [0.34-1.25]) were more effective than interventions occurring at the individual level (g = 0.67 [0.12-1.22]). Study quality was moderate, and (mean ± SD) 17.9 ± 4.3 (63.9%) of 28 checklist items were reported. Preliminary evidence suggests that ECEC-based interventions to increase CVF are highly effective at improving preschool children's exercise test scores. Although ECEC-based interventions show promise, the small number of studies included in this review limits confidence in these findings. Review registered at PROSPERO CRD42018099115.