A collaborative approach to adopting/ adapting guidelines. The Australian 24-hour movement guidelines for children (5-12 years) and young people (13-17 years): An integration of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep

Okely, Anthony D. and Ghersi, Davina and Loughran, Sarah P. and Cliff, Dylan P. and Shilton, Trevor and Jones, Rachel A. and Stanley, Rebecca M. and Sherring, Julie and Toms, Natalie and Eckermann, Simon and Olds, Timothy S. and Zhang, Zhiguang and Parrish, Anne-Maree and Kervin, Lisa and Downie, Sandra and Salmon, Jo and Bannerman, Clair and Needham, Tamie and Marshall, Elaine and Kaufman, Jordy and Brown, Layne and Wille, Janecke and Wood, Greg and Lubans, David R. and Biddle, Stuart J. H. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7663-6895 and Pill, Shane and Hargreaves, Anthea and Jonas, Natalie and Schranz, Natasha and Campbell, Perry and Ingram, Karen and Dean, Hayley and Verrender, Adam and Ellis, Yvonne and Chong, Kar Hau and Dumuid, Dorothea and Katzmarzyk, Peter T. and Draper, Catherine E. and Lewthwaite, Hayley and Tremblay, Mark S. (2022) A collaborative approach to adopting/ adapting guidelines. The Australian 24-hour movement guidelines for children (5-12 years) and young people (13-17 years): An integration of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 19 (1):2. pp. 1-21.

[img]
Preview
Text (Published Version)
Okely (2022) Aus young people 24h guidelines.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (3MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: In 2018, the Australian Government updated the Australian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children and Young People. A requirement of this update was the incorporation of a 24-hour approach to movement, recognising the importance of adequate sleep. The purpose of this paper was to describe how the updated Australian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Young People (5 to 17 years): an integration of physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep were developed and the outcomes from this process. Methods: The GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach was used to develop the guidelines. A Leadership Group was formed, who identified existing credible guidelines. The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Children and Youth best met the criteria established by the Leadership Group. These guidelines were evaluated based on the evidence in the GRADE tables, summaries of findings tables and recommendations from the Canadian Guidelines. We conducted updates to each of the Canadian systematic reviews. A Guideline Development Group reviewed, separately and in combination, the evidence for each behaviour. A choice was then made to adopt or adapt the Canadian recommendations for each behaviour or create de novo recommendations. We then conducted an online survey (n=237) along with three focus groups (n=11 in total) and 13 key informant interviews. Stakeholders used these to provide feedback on the draft guidelines. Results: Based on the evidence from the Canadian systematic reviews and the updated systematic reviews in Australia, the Guideline Development Group agreed to adopt the Canadian recommendations and, apart from some minor changes to the wording of good practice statements, maintain the wording of the guidelines, preamble, and title of the Canadian Guidelines. The Australian Guidelines provide evidence-informed recommendations for a healthy day (24-hours), integrating physical activity, sedentary behaviour (including limits to screen time), and sleep for children (5-12 years) and young people (13-17 years). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is only the second time the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach has been used to develop movement behaviour guidelines. The judgments of the Australian Guideline Development Group did not differ sufficiently to change the directions and strength of the recommendations and as such, the Canadian Guidelines were adopted with only very minor alterations. This allowed the Australian Guidelines to be developed in a shorter time frame and at a lower cost. We recommend the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach, especially if a credible set of guidelines that was developed using the GRADE approach is available with all supporting materials. Other countries may consider this approach when developing and/or revising national movement guidelines.


Statistics for USQ ePrint 49946
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: Article (Commonwealth Reporting Category C)
Refereed: Yes
Item Status: Live Archive
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Current - Institute for Resilient Regions - Centre for Health Research (1 Apr 2020 -)
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Current - Institute for Resilient Regions - Centre for Health Research (1 Apr 2020 -)
Date Deposited: 19 Jul 2022 02:01
Last Modified: 10 Oct 2022 01:59
Uncontrolled Keywords: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT; Guideline development; Methodology; Public health recommendations
Fields of Research (2020): 42 HEALTH SCIENCES > 4207 Sports science and exercise > 420799 Sports science and exercise not elsewhere classified
42 HEALTH SCIENCES > 4206 Public health > 420601 Community child health
Socio-Economic Objectives (2020): 20 HEALTH > 2099 Other health > 209999 Other health not elsewhere classified
Identification Number or DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01236-2
URI: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/id/eprint/49946

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only