BackgroundIn 2017, the Australian Government funded the update of the National Physical Activity Recommendations for Children 0–5 years, with the intention that they be an integration of movement behaviours across the 24-h period. The benefit for Australia was that it could leverage research in Canada in the development of their 24-h guidelines for the early years. Concurrently, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group published a model to produce guidelines based on adoption, adaption and/or de novo development using the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework. Referred to as the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach, it allows guideline developers to follow a structured and transparent process in a more efficient manner, potentially avoiding the need to unnecessarily repeat costly tasks such as conducting systematic reviews. The purpose of this paper is to outline the process and outcomes for adapting the Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years to develop the Australian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for the Early Years guided by the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT framework. MethodsThe development process was guided by the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach. A Leadership Group and Consensus Panel were formed and existing credible guidelines identified. The draft Canadian 24-h integrated movement guidelines for the early years best met the criteria established by the Panel. These were evaluated based on the evidence in the GRADE tables, summaries of findings tables and draft recommendations from the Canadian Draft Guidelines. Updates to each of the Canadian systematic reviews were conducted and the Consensus Panel reviewed the evidence for each behaviour separately and made a decision to adopt or adapt the Canadian recommendations for each behaviour or create de novo recommendations. An online survey was then conducted (n = 302) along with five focus groups (n = 30) and five key informant interviews (n = 5) to obtain feedback from stakeholders on the draft guidelines.ResultsBased on the evidence from the Canadian systematic reviews and the updated systematic reviews in Australia, the Consensus Panel agreed to adopt the Canadian recommendations and, apart from some minor changes to the wording of good practice statements, keep the wording of the guidelines, preamble and title of the Canadian Guidelines. The Australian Guidelines provide evidence-informed recommendations for a healthy day (24-h), integrating physical activity, sedentary behaviour (including limits to screen time), and sleep for infants (<1 year), toddlers (1–2 years) and preschoolers (3–5 years).ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is only the second time the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach has been used. Following this approach, the judgments of the Australian Consensus Panel did not differ sufficiently to change the directions and strength of the recommendations and as such, the Canadian recommendations were adopted with very minor alterations. This allowed the Guidelines to be developed much faster and at lower cost. As such, ...

Background In 2018, the Australian Government updated the Australian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children and Young People. A requirement of this update was the incorporation of a 24-hour approach to movement, recognising the importance of adequate sleep. The purpose of this paper was to describe how the updated Australian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Young People (5 to 17 years): an integration of physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep were developed and the outcomes from this process. Methods The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach was used to develop the guidelines. A Leadership Group was formed, who identified existing credible guidelines. The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth best met the criteria established by the Leadership Group. These guidelines were evaluated based on the evidence in the GRADE tables, summaries of findings tables and recommendations from the Canadian Guidelines. We conducted updates to each of the Canadian systematic reviews. A Guideline Development Group reviewed, separately and in combination, the evidence for each behaviour. A choice was then made to adopt or adapt the Canadian recommendations for each behaviour or create de novo recommendations. We then conducted an online survey (n=237) along with three focus groups (n=11 in total) and 13 key informant interviews. Stakeholders used these to provide feedback on the draft guidelines. Results Based on the evidence from the Canadian systematic reviews and the updated systematic reviews in Australia, the Guideline Development Group agreed to adopt the Canadian recommendations and, apart from some minor changes to the wording of good practice statements, maintain the wording of the guidelines, preamble, and title of the Canadian Guidelines. The Australian Guidelines provide evidence-informed recommendations for a healthy day (24-hours), integrating physical activity, sedentary behaviour (including limits to screen time), and sleep for children (5-12 years) and young people (13-17 years). Conclusions To our knowledge, this is only the second time the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach has been used to develop movement behaviour guidelines. The judgments of the Australian Guideline Development Group did not differ sufficiently to change the directions and strength of the recommendations and as such, the Canadian Guidelines were adopted with only very minor alterations. This allowed the Australian Guidelines to be developed in a shorter time frame and at a lower cost. We recommend the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach, especially if a credible set of guidelines that was developed using the GRADE approach is available with all supporting materials. Other countries may consider this approach when developing and/or revising national movement guidelines.

The etiology of Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF) is controversial. While the majority of studies have indicated that there is no relationship between EMF exposure and symptoms reported by IEI-EMF sufferers, concerns about methodological issues have been raised. Addressing these concerns, the present experiment was designed as a series of individual case studies to determine whether there is a relationship between radiofrequency-electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure and an IEI-EMF individual's self-reported symptoms. Three participants aged 44-64 were tested during a series of sham and active exposure trials (2 open-label trials; 12 randomized, double-blind, counterbalanced trials), where symptom severity and exposure detection were scored using 100 mm visual analogue scales. The RF-EMF exposure was a 902-928 MHz spread spectrum digitally modulated signal with an average radiated power output of 1 W (0.3 W/m incident power density at the participant). In the double-blind trials, no significant difference in symptom severity or exposure detection was found for any of the participants between the two conditions. Belief of exposure strongly predicted symptom severity score for all participants. Despite accounting for several possible limitations, the present experiment failed to show a relationship between RF-EMF exposure and an IEI-EMF individual's symptoms. Bioelectromagnetics. 39:132-143, 2018. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

While there has been consistent evidence that symptoms reported by individuals who suffer from Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF) are not caused by EMF and are more closely associated with a nocebo effect, whether this response is specific to IEI-EMF sufferers and what triggers it, remains unclear. The present experiment tested whether perceived EMF exposure could elicit symptoms in healthy participants, and whether viewing an 'alarmist' video could exacerbate a nocebo response. Participants were randomly assigned to watch either an alarmist (N = 22) or control video (N = 22) before completing a series of sham and active radiofrequency (RF) EMF exposure provocation trials (2 open-label, followed by 12 randomized, double-blind, counterbalanced trials). Pre- and post-video state anxiety and risk perception, as well as belief of exposure and symptom ratings during the open-label and double-blind provocation trials, were assessed. Symptoms were higher in the open-label RF-ON than RF-OFF trial (p < .001). No difference in either symptoms (p = .183) or belief of exposure (p = .144) was observed in the double-blind trials. Participants who viewed the alarmist video had a significant increase in symptoms (p = .041), state anxiety (p < .01) and risk perception (p < .001) relative to the control group. These results reveal the crucial role of awareness and belief in the presentation of symptoms during perceived exposure to EMF, showing that healthy participants exhibit a nocebo response, and that alarmist media reports emphasizing adverse effects of EMF also contribute to a nocebo response.