Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: SWITCH® is an evidence-based childhood obesity prevention program that works through schools to impact parenting practices. The present study was designed as a formative evaluation to test whether an online version of SWITCH® would work equivalently as the established print version. METHODS: Ten elementary schools were matched by socio-economic status and randomly assigned to receive either the print (n = 5) or online (n = 5) version. A total of 211 children from 22, 3(rd) grade classrooms were guided through the 4 month program by a team of program leaders working in cooperation with the classroom teachers. Children were tasked with completing weekly SWITCH® Trackers with their parents to monitor goal setting efforts in showing positive Do (≥60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity), View (≤2 hours of screen time), and Chew (≥5 servings of fruits and vegetables) behaviors on each day. A total of 91 parents completed a brief survey to assess project-specific interactions with their child and the impact on their behaviors. RESULTS: The majority of parents (93.2%) reported satisfactory experiences with either the online or print SWITCH® program. The return rate for the SWITCH® Trackers was higher (42.5% ± 11%) from the print schools compared to the online schools (27.4% ± 10.9%). District program managers rated the level of teacher engagement in regards to program facilitation and the results showed a higher Trackers return rate in the highly engaged schools (38.5% ± 13.3%) than the lowly engaged schools (28.6 ± 11.9%). No significant differences were observed in parent/child interactions or reported behavior change (ps > .05) suggesting the equivalence in intervention effect for print and online versions of the SWITCH® program. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the utility of the online SWITCH® platform but school-based modules are needed to facilitate broader school engagement by classroom teachers and PE teachers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Welk et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: