Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: Maïté Verloigne x
Clear All Modify Search
Open access

Jan Seghers, Stijn De Baere, Maïté Verloigne and Greet Cardon

Open access

Anne I. Wijtzes, Maïté Verloigne, Alexandre Mouton, Marc Cloes, Karin A.A. De Ridder, Greet Cardon and Jan Seghers

Background:

This 2016 Belgium Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth is the first systematic evaluation of physical activity (PA) behaviors, related health behaviors, health outcomes, and influences thereon, using the Active Healthy Kids Canada grading framework.

Methods:

A research working group consisting of PA experts from both Flanders and Wallonia collaborated to determine the indicators to be graded, data sources to be used, and factors to be taken into account during the grading process. Grades were finalized after consensus was reached among the research working group and 2 stakeholder groups consisting of academic and policy experts in the fields of PA, sedentary behavior, and dietary behavior.

Results:

Eleven indicators were selected and assigned the following grades: Overall PA (F+), Organized Sport Participation (C-), Active Play (C+), Active Transportation (C-), Sedentary Behaviors (D-), School (B-), Government Strategies and Investment (C+), and Weight Status (D). Incomplete grades were assigned to Family and Peers, Community and the Built Environment, and Dietary Behaviors due to a lack of nationally representative data.

Conclusions:

Despite moderately positive social and environmental influences, PA levels of Belgian children and youth are low while levels of sedentary behaviors are high.

Restricted access

Maïté Verloigne, Nicola D. Ridgers, Mai Chinapaw, Teatske Altenburg, Elling Bere, Sveinung Berntsen, Greet Cardon, Johannes Brug, Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij, Wendy Van Lippevelde and Lea Maes

There are currently no studies available reporting intervention effects on breaking up children’s sedentary time. This study examined the UP4FUN intervention effect on objectively measured number of breaks in sedentary time, number of sedentary bouts (> 10 mins) and total and average amount of time spent in those sedentary bouts among 10- to 12-year-old Belgian children. The total sample included 354 children (mean age: 10.9 ± 0.7 years; 59% girls) with valid ActiGraph accelerometer data at pre- and posttest. Only few and small intervention effects were found, namely on total time spent in sedentary bouts immediately after school hours (4-6PM; β = -3.51mins) and on average time spent in sedentary bouts before school hours (6-8.30AM; β = -4.83mins) and immediately after school hours in favor of children from intervention schools (β = -2.71mins). Unexpectedly, girls from intervention schools decreased the number of breaks during school hours (8.30AM-4PM; β = -23.45breaks) and increased the number of sedentary bouts on a weekend day (β = +0.90bouts), whereas girls in control schools showed an increase in number of breaks and a decrease in number of bouts. In conclusion, UP4FUN did not have a consistent or substantial effect on breaking up children’s sedentary time and these data suggest that more intensive and longer lasting interventions are needed.