Objective: The aim of this study was to identify promoting and inhibiting correlates associated with the physical activity (PA) of children and adolescents (aged 3–18). The intention was to demonstrate the complexity of correlates of PA and to determine possible influencing factors. Design: A systematic review of reviews. Methods: Systematic database research was carried out in Medline, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Springer Link and Thieme Connect. Inclusion criteria were that the study: (a) was classified as a systematic review with or without meta-analysis; (b) was published between 2000 and 2009; (c) dealt with children and adolescents aged 3–18; (d) had as its dependent variable any measure of overall PA; and (e) reviewed associations between quantitatively measured variables and PA. The internal validity of the systematic reviews thus identified was evaluated using a validated quality instrument. Results: Nine systematic reviews without meta-analysis and one systematic review with meta-analysis were selected. Altogether 16 correlates were identified which were consistently associated with PA of children and/or adolescents: sex, age, ethnicity, parental education, family income, socioeconomic status, perceived competence, self-efficacy, goal orientation/motivation, perceived barriers, participation in community sports, parental support, support from significant others, access to sport/recreational facilities und time outdoors. Conclusions: Although the findings of the reviews covered are to some extent heterogeneous, it is possible to identify consistent correlates of PA in children and adolescents. The results show that PA is a complex and multi-dimensional behaviour determined by numerous biological, psychological, sociocultural and environmental factors.

The increasing prevalence of risk factors associated with physical inactivity lead to an economic burden on society. The article uses the example of the prevention measure "fit for pisa" to investigate to what extent a full economic evaluation can provide a basis for decision-makers. The intervention integrated the daily physical education at 5 primary schools in Göttingen for the entire school term. The study is intended to provide information on short- and long-term potential savings. A process analysis identified the prevention performance from a societal perspective. Resource consumption was recorded in (partly) standardisedform and evaluated and also revealed the need for investment in sports halls with capacity to expand the programme to all primary schools in Göttingen. In the routine the implementation costs of half-day schools are 619 € per student year; for all-day schools 236 € per student year. The consideration of the short-term outcomes shows that TV viewing has decreased and physical activity has been strongly encouraged. The active life style promotion has shown an improvement on BMI in the medium-term. On the basis of a decision analytical model, a cost-benefit analysis of the program over the life course will be undertaken.

BackgroundPreschools offer high potential for preventive interventions. However, little is known about the structure of preschool programmes to promote physical activity (PA) in preschoolers although almost all children aged three to six years spend one third of the day at preschool. The aim of this study was to determine whether and to what extent preschools implement systematic PA promotion measures using an instrument specifically developed to assess and systematize preschool PA programmes.MethodsIn the cross-sectional study a baseline survey of preschool education policies was conducted to identify and assess the type and extent of PA programmes and opportunities in preschools in the State of Lower Saxony, Germany. An assessment instrument was developed to identify preschools with systematic PA programmes (type 1) and those without PA programmes (type 2) based on the following quality criteria: A) written PA policy, B) structured weekly PA offerings for all children; C) at least one qualified physical education teacher; D) PA-friendly indoor and outdoor facilities (exercise room, situational PA opportunities, outdoor areas, play equipment etc.), and E) structured PA promotion in place for at least two years. A third type of preschool that promotes PA in children to some extent (i.e., that meets the criteria partially but not completely) was classified as “preschools with limited PA programmes”.Results2415 preschools participated in the survey (response rate: 59%). The results show that 26% (n = 554) have a systematic PA programme while 3% (n = 64) have no PA programme. Most (71%, n = 1514) were classified as limited PA programme preschools. All three types of preschools differed significantly (p = .000) from each other in terms of size (small vs. large). Most of the preschools without PA programmes are small half-day preschools.ConclusionsThe study investigated an assessment-instrument providing extensive insight into the nature, extent and routine practical implementation of PA promotion in preschools. The criteria used to evaluate preschool PA programmes are well-suited to identify the different preschool PA programme types and target areas in the field of PA promotion in which specific measures (teacher education, structured PA offerings, etc.) can be implemented in future interventions.

Background The number of obese children is rising worldwide. Many studies have investigated single determinants of children’s body mass index (BMI), yet studies measuring determinants at different potential levels of influence are sparse. The aim of this study is to investigate the independent role of parental socioeconomic position (SEP), additional family factors at the micro level, as well as early childhood education and care (ECEC) centre characteristics at the meso level regarding BMI. Methods Analyses used the baseline data of the PReschool INtervention Study (PRINS) including up to 1,151 children from 53 ECEC centres. Multi-level models first estimated the associations of parental SEP indicators (parental school education, vocational training, and household income) with the children’s standard deviation scores for BMI (SDS BMI, standardised for age and gender). Second, structural (number of siblings), psychosocial (strained family relationships), and nutrition behavioural (soft-drink consumption, frequency of fast-food restaurant visits) family factors at the micro level were included. Third, characteristics of the ECEC centre at the meso level in terms of average group size, the ratio of overweight children in the group, ECEC centre type (all-day care), and the location of the ECEC centre (rural vs urban) were included. All analyses were stratified by gender and adjusted for age, migration background, and parental employment status. Results Estimates for boys and girls appeared to differ. In the full model, for boys the parental SEP indicators were not related to SDS BMI. Factors related to SDS BMI in boys were: two or more siblings; B = -.55; p = 0.045 [ref.: no sibling]), the characteristics of the ECEC centre in terms of average group size (20 – 25 children; B = -.54; p = 0.022 [ref.: < 20 children]), and the ratio of overweight children (more overweight children B = -1.39; p < 0.001 [ref.: few overweight children]). For girls the number of siblings (two and more siblings; B = .67; p = 0.027 [ref.: no sibling]) and average group size (> 25 children; B = -.52; p = 0.037 [ref.: < 20 children]) were related to SDS BMI. Conclusions The BMI of preschool children appears to be associated with determinants at the micro and meso level, however with some gender differences. The identified factors at the micro and meso level appear largely modifiable and can inform about possible interventions to reduce obesity in preschool children.