Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 28, 2026

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
Published on: September 11, 2021
Process evaluation of the IDEFICS school intervention: putting the evaluation of the effect on children's objectively
M Verloigne1,2, W Ahrens3,4, S De Henauw5,6
1Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Objectives:
The first aim was to describe the intervention implementation and reception with specific regard to physical activity (PA) within Belgian schools participating in the IDEFICS (Identification and prevention of Dietary- and lifestyle-induced health EFfects In Children and infantS) intervention. Second, we examined if a higher intervention process score in schools showed more favourable effects on children's objectively measured PA and sedentary time (ST).
Methods:
The IDEFICS intervention focused on improving children's health behaviour (including PA) at the community, school/kindergarten and family level. Five process evaluation questionnaires completed by school working groups, and (physical education) teachers were used for the process evaluation of four intervention modules (school working groups, healthy weeks, school environment, health-related physical education and PA). Items were summed to calculate a total intervention process score per school. Schools were subdivided into three groups (low, medium and high score). Multilevel models were used to examine if changes in PA or ST differed between schools with a low, medium or high score. In total, 333 children (54.1% girls, mean age 6.0 ± 1.5 years) from 34 intervention schools (18 pre-schools and 16 primary schools) in the town of Geraardsbergen, Belgium, provided valid accelerometer data for two weekdays and one weekend day.
Results:
Mean intervention process score (maximum value = 44) was 20.9 ± 5.8 for schools. The breakdown per module showed which components were implemented and received well and which components could have been improved. After the intervention, the decrease in light PA and increase in ST was much higher in children from primary schools with a low intervention process score, whereas the behaviours remained relatively stable in children from primary schools with a medium or high score. The change in moderate to vigorous PA did not differ significantly between schools with a low, medium or high score.
Conclusion:
The IDEFICS intervention was relatively able to prevent unfavourable changes in ST and light PA in schools with a medium and high intervention process score. Further process evaluation research is needed to obtain a more profound picture of the IDEFICS intervention process.
More Related Videos
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
06:16Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation III: PIE
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Nursing Evaluation
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning,...
Self-Evaluation Maintenance Model
Operant Conditioning Intervention
In operant conditioning, behaviors that are...