An observational study in Physical Activity, Adolescent Behavior and Parenting, sponsored by Pennington Biomedical Research Center. Completed at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-07-24.
Sponsored by Pennington Biomedical Research Center · Observational
Parental constraint of outdoor play may be fueling unhealthy emotional and physical development in today's children and adolescents. Time spent outdoors is a key determinant of unstructured play and overall physical activity levels, both of which are crucial to optimal development in youth. Modern barriers - such as crime, poor social ties among neighbors, and unsafe physical environments - constrain parental practices and reduce opportunities for outdoor play in children and youth. Low levels of perceived collective efficacy, a measure of perceived neighborhood cohesion and the collective capacity to solve neighborhood problems, has been proposed as a social environmental factor that constrains outdoor play by parents either attempting to avoid potentially dangerous situations or using defensive behavior by upgrading security measures. Moreover, incivilities in the neighborhood physical environment (e.g. litter, graffiti, blighted property) may influence parents' perceived collective efficacy. Consequently, a child's ability to achieve the recommended minimum of 60 minutes of daily physical activity may be limited by a complex interaction between neighborhood social and physical environmental factors and the extent to which parents respond by constraining offspring outdoor play. The central hypothesis of this research is that modifiable factors in the neighborhood social and physical environment result in parental constraint of offspring outdoor play, which reduces overall physical activity during critical years of development. This research will use qualitative methods to generate a comprehensive understanding of how and which environmental factors play a crucial role in parental constraint of outdoor play and promote low levels of within-neighborhood physical activity. This ancillary study will recruit 32 parents/guardians of participants from the parent study, Translational Investigation of Growth and Everyday Routines in Kids (TIGER Kids) Study (USDA 3092-51000-056-04A), to participate in in-depth interviews. My ultimate goal is to use knowledge gained from this ancillary study to generate community-based interventions that will target neighborhood factors to successfully reduce parental constraints on outdoor play.
305 studies on the registry are indexed under Adolescent Behavior; 47 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 30 is below the median of 247 across 40 observational studies indexed under Adolescent Behavior.
Browse Adolescent Behavior studies →Pennington Biomedical Research Center is the lead sponsor of 284 studies on the registry; 31 are open to participants now.
Compared within Adolescent Behavior, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Motor Activity. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →
32 parents/guardians of participants from the TIGER Kids parent study will be recruited for this study. All parents/guardians will be recruited after their child has completed the baseline (Y0) TIGER Kids study visit.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
-Child completed baseline measures (Y0) for the parent study, TIGER Kids Study (USDA 3092-51000-056-04A).
Exclusion Criteria:
Perceptions of how the social environment influences parenting practices related to outdoor play and youth's physical activity.
Indepth interviews will be used to measure parental perceptions of how the social environment in which they live influences their parenting decisions regarding their child's outdoor play.
Time frame: One time-point, 1 hour in-depth interview
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: No — There is currently no plan to share IPD. Qualitative data may be difficult to prepare to ensure privacy of the participant. Furthermore, we do not see the benefit of sharing IPD from this study as qualitative data cannot be easily reanalyzed to validate study findings, combined with other datasets, and has a high risk of being analyzed using invalid/non-rigorous methods.
This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center →