A protocol for coordinating rural community stakeholders to implement whole-of-community youth physical activity surveillance through school systems

• Main Authors: Michaela A. Schenkelberg, Ann M. Essay, Marisa S. Rosen, Arissa E. Bavari, Sara J. Norgelas, Richard R. Rosenkranz, Gregory J. Welk, David A. Dzewaltowski
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier 2021-12-01
• Series: Preventive Medicine Reports
• Subjects: Population Health; Population Surveillance; Adolescent; Child; Rural Health; Community Networks
• Online Access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335521002266

Accurate and effective local data collection systems are needed to inform community change on youth health behaviors such as physical activity (PA). Systematic methods are particularly important for understanding PA behaviors that may be influenced by individual, interpersonal, organizational, and regional factors. The purpose of this study was to describe a protocol for coordinating community stakeholders to implement an online youth PA surveillance instrument. The research team collaborated with local health departments (LHDs) from two rural communities to coordinate schools in implementing school-wide youth PA surveillance. A data sharing agreement was established between all partners. School administrators and teachers attended in-person training sessions for an online PA survey and how to use the data. Following the training, students were provided individualized logins to complete the survey once a semester over a two-year academic period. Across both communities, 23 teachers and administrators attended the training sessions that were facilitated by the LHDs and research team. In Year 1 (Y1), a total of 465 3rd through 6th grade students were enrolled in the participating schools (community 1 = 227; community 2 = 238). Survey response rates ranged from 86.1% to 95.4% completion, depending on the community and semester. In Year 2 (Y2), a total of 501 3rd through 6th grade students were enrolled (community 1 = 260; community 2 = 241). Response rates ranged from 86.3% to 89.6% in the fall term. A protocol for coordinating LHD and community stakeholders was an effective strategy for implementing population-level youth PA surveillance with high levels of reach.