TGfU school-implementation research 2014–2019 comprises only 12 school-based studies despite many publications¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A PRISMA/PICO systematic search of four databases yielded only 12 articles on TGfU implementation in schools between January 2014 and December 2019. → Barba-Martín Raúl A. 2020 q3 i? The authors interpret this as a contrast between theoretical or out-of-school research and research carried out in schools during PE. → Barba-Martín Raúl A. 2020

Evidence¶

Barba-Martín Raúl A. 2020¶

Barba-Martín Raúl A., Bores-García Daniel, Hortigüela-Alcalá David, González-Calvo Gustavo. (2020). The Application of the Teaching Games for Understanding in Physical Education. Systematic Review of the Last Six Years. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093330

q3 · i? · review · r2

Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines with the PICO strategy, searching Taylor and Francis, ERIC, SCOPUS and Web of Science for publications between January 2014 and December 2019; 449 initial publications were screened and "12 articles were fully assessed". The review reports a "great contrast between theoretical research or research outside school contexts and those carried out in schools".

"According to PRISMA guidelines and including the PICO strategy after the exclusion criteria, 12 articles were fully assessed based on eight criteria"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Motor and cognitive domains are the most frequent TGfU learning outcomes studied; the social domain is rare and often negative
• TGfU studies generally report positive results for game performance and understanding, but reveal weaknesses in the social domain relative to other models
• TGfU implementations in schools are typically short-term, which the review judges too short to achieve significant outcomes
• In a randomized crossover trial, PICO searching yielded higher average sensitivity and lower average precision than unguided searching, not statistically significant — related
• PICO versus PICOS and SPIDER: PICO gave higher sensitivity and lower precision, but with different numbers of search blocks per model — related
• The number of search blocks impacts search quality: fewer blocks yield higher sensitivity and lower precision — related