PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Frazer, Marie
AU  - Seims, Amanda
AU  - Tatterton, Michael J
AU  - Lockyer, Bridget
AU  - Bingham, Daniel D
AU  - Barber, Sally E
AU  - Daly-Smith, Andy
AU  - Hall, Jennifer
TI  - Child and family experiences of a whole-system approach to physical activity: a citizen science evaluation protocol
AID  - 10.1101/2022.10.18.22281188
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.10.18.22281188
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/20/2022.10.18.22281188.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/10/20/2022.10.18.22281188.full
AB  - Introduction Whole systems approaches are being adopted to tackle physical inactivity. The mechanisms contributing to changes resulting from whole system approaches are not fully understood. The voices of children and families that these approaches are designed for need to be heard to understand what is working, for whom, where, and in what context. This paper describes the protocol for the children and families’ citizen science evaluation of the JU:MP programme, a whole systems approach to increasing physical activity in children and young people aged 5-14 years in Bradford, UK.Methods and analysis The evaluation aims to understand the lived experiences of children and families’ relationship with physical activity and participation in the JU:MP programme. The study takes a collaborative and contributory citizen science approach, including focus groups, parent-child dyad interviews and participatory research. Feedback and data will guide changes within this study and the JU:MP programme. We also aim to examine participant experience of citizen science and the suitability of a citizen science approach to evaluate a whole systems approach. Data will be analysed using Framework approach alongside iterative analysis with and by citizen scientists in the collaborative citizen science study.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by The University of Bradford: Study One (E891-focus groups as part of the control trial, E982-parent-child dyad interviews), Study Two (E992). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and summaries will be provided to the participants, through schools or directly. The citizen scientists input to create further dissemination opportunities.Strengths and Limitations of this studyThis protocol is the first, to our knowledge, to describe a citizen science-based evaluation of a whole systems approach to physical activity with children and families.The novel and innovative study design allows children and families to be at the centre of our understanding of what encourages and discourages them to be active.By conducting citizen science as part of a reactive process evaluation, improvements to the research and the implementation can be made in real time, centred around those who matter mostThe study emphasises the importance of the research participant experience within citizen science and sets out how to evaluate and improve experience.Limitations include a small sample size. Whilst this is intentional as it will allow us to capture in depth, meaningful data over time, it will likely make it more difficult to capture a diverse range of experiences. There is an option for the children participating in the collaborative citizen science study to conduct research amongst their wider peers, this is dependent on whether they want to do this, to allow them freedom and ownership over the researchCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe authors involvement was supported by Sport Englands Local Delivery Pilot Bradford; weblink: https://www.sportengland.org/campaigns-and-our-work/local-delivery. Sport England is a non-departmental public body under the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of Sport England. JU:MP is part of ActEarly. ActEarly is a UKPRP (United Kingdom Prevention Research Partnership) funded research consortium which focuses on upstream early life interventions to improve the health and opportunities for children living in two contrasting areas with high levels of child poverty: Bradford, Yorkshire and Tower Hamlets, London. Sally Barber and Bridget Lockyers time was supported by the UK Prevention Research Partnership (MR/S037527/1), an initiative funded by UK Research and Innovation Councils, the Department of Health and Social Care (England) and the UK devolved administrations, and leading health research charities and the National Institute for Health Research Yorkshire and Humber Applied Research Collaboration. Marie Frazer is a PhD student jointly funded by The University of Bradford and Sport England. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics approval was granted by the Chair of Humanities, Social and Health Sciences Research Ethics Panel at the University of Bradford for both studies (June 2022): Study One (E891-focus groups as part of the control trial, E982-parent-child dyad interviews), Study Two (E992). For Study Two, given the collaborative citizen science approach, ethics approval covers participant on boarding, the study in principle and the first workshop. Ethical amendments will be submitted at (at least) two further points: 1. once the data collection method has been decided on and 2. once the data analysis approach has been finalised (See table 2)I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe dataset that will be generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available to reserve the anonymity of research participants.JU:MPJoin Us: Move. PlayLDPLocal Delivery PilotCEMCommunity Engagement Manager