Sport and dance interventions for healthy young people (15–24 years) to promote subjective well-being: a systematic review

Objective To review and assess effectiveness of sport and dance participation on subjective well-being outcomes among healthy young people aged 15–24 years. Design Systematic review. Methods We searched for studies published in any language between January 2006 and September 2016 on PsychINFO, Ovid MEDLINE, Eric, Web of Science (Arts and Humanities Citation Index, Social Science and Science Citation Index), Scopus, PILOTS, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and International Index to Performing Arts. Additionally, we searched for unpublished (grey) literature via an online call for evidence, expert contribution, searches of key organisation websites and the British Library EThOS database, and a keyword Google search. Published studies of sport or dance interventions for healthy young people aged 15–24 years where subjective well-being was measured were included. Studies were excluded if participants were paid professionals or elite athletes, or if the intervention was clinical sport/dance therapy. Two researchers extracted data and assessed strength and quality of evidence using criteria in the What Works Centre for Wellbeing methods guide and GRADE, and using standardised reporting forms. Due to clinical heterogeneity between studies, meta-analysis was not appropriate. Grey literature in the form of final evaluation reports on empirical data relating to sport or dance interventions were included. Results Eleven out of 6587 articles were included (7 randomised controlled trials and 1 cohort study, and 3 unpublished grey evaluation reports). Published literature suggests meditative physical activity (yoga and Baduanjin Qigong) and group-based or peer-supported sport and dance has some potential to improve subjective well-being. Grey literature suggests sport and dance improve subjective well-being but identify negative feelings of competency and capability. The amount and quality of published evidence on sport and dance interventions to enhance subjective well-being is low. Conclusions Meditative activities, group and peer-supported sport and dance may promote subjective well-being enhancement in youth. Evidence is limited. Better designed studies are needed. Trial registration number CRD42016048745; Results.


Self-esteem
10-item scale that measures global selfworth by measuring both positive and negative feelings about the self. The scale is believed to be uni-dimensional. All items are answered using a 4-point Likert scale format ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Five of the items have positively worded statements and five have negatively worded ones. The scale measures state self-esteem by asking the respondents to reflect on their current feelings.
Combined scores from each item for a dingle global indicator (higher the score the higher the level of burnout) Raedeke and Smith (2001)  Brown correlation for the reliability of the BDI yielded a coefficient of .93. Criticisms; BDI-IA only addresses six out of the nine DSM-III criteria for depression, self-reported (reporting bias), questionnaire therefore the way administered could affect outcome e.g. social desirability. If pt has a physical illness the physical symptoms such as fatigue may score higher but not reflect depression. Subjective Exercise Experiences Scale (SEES) Measuring 3 dimensions; positive wellbeing, psychological distress, and fatigue "By circling a number on the scale below each of the following items, please indicate the degree to which you are experiencing each feeling now, at this point in time, after exercising". Each item rated on a 7-point Likert scale: 1 (Not at all) -7 (Very much so). 12 item scale (4 items per dimension): great, awful, drained, positive, crummy, exhausted, strong, discouraged, fatigued, terrific, miserable, and tired.
The Items (4 items per dimension) are summed to create a summary score for Positive Well-Being, Psychological Distress and Fatigue. Therefore each dimension has a possible score up to 28, the higher the number the higher the association with the trait.
Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) Hedonic Well-Being/ the intensity associated with both positive and negative dimensions of global affect 20-item self-report instrument. Rate each using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Not At All or Very Slightly) to 5 (Very Much).
PANAS for Children (PANAS-C): 30-item measure (15 positive affect and 15 negative affect items). Indicate how often they have felt interested, sad, and so on during the "past few weeks" on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely).
Positive Affect Score: range from 10 -50, with higher scores representing higher levels of positive affect. Negative Affect Score: ranges from 10 -50, with lower scores representing lower levels of negative affect.

PANAS-C:
Summation scores for positive affect and negative affect range from 10 to75 each.
Reliability and Validity reported by Watson (1988) was moderately good. For the Positive Affect Scale, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.86 to 0.90; for the Negative Affect Scale, 0.84 to 0.87. Over a 8week time period, the test-retest correlations were 0.47-0.68 for the PA and 0.39-0.71 for the NA. The PANAS has strong reported validity with such measures as general distress and dysfunction, depression, and state anxiety.
PANAS-C has demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity in adolescent samples Self-Esteem Scale (SES) Self-esteem 10 items, and the total score ranges from 10 to 40. 10-items measuring the degree to which events are appraised as stressful during the past month. Items rated on a Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Items designed to tap how unpredictable, uncontrollable, and over-loaded respondents find their lives. The scale also includes several direct queries about current levels of experienced stress.
Higher composite scores indicate greater perceived stress.
The PSS is the most widely used psychological instrument for measuring the perception of stress. CPSS-10 showed a stable twofactor structure with satisfactory internal consistency and construct validity (Siu-man Ng, 2013)

Inventory of Positive Psychological Attitudes
Positive worldview, Confidence in Life and Self (two subscales: Life Purpose and Satisfaction (LPS) and Self-Confidence During Stress (SCDS)).

32-item, 7-point Likert self-report scale.
Example questions: Life Purpose and Satisfaction Section: My daily activities are -Response: not a source of satisfaction to a source of satisfaction (7 pt scale) Self-Confidence During Stress Section: When there is a great deal of pressure being placed on me -Response: I get tense to I remain calm (7 pt scale).
Each score is calculated as a mean; possible scores ranging from 1 to 7. Designed for people aged 16 years and older. 57-item self-report tool with a 4-point Likert response format. The instrument is categorized into subscales that reflect state anger (3 subscales), trait anger (2 subscales), and anger expression ().
Study reported in used sub scales measuring anger expression. Anger expression was conceptualized as having 3 major components: anger-out (outward expression of anger), anger-in (anger suppression), and anger control (attempts to control expression of anger) For each scale, summation scores range from 8 to 32.
Higher the score = stronger association. Higher Anger-in = more negative anger expression, higher anger-out = more negative anger expression, higher anger control = better anger control.
Strong reliability and validity. STAXI-2 has been shown to be a suitable instrument to measure both the experience and the expression of anger in both general and clinical populations (Lievaart, Franken, Hovens, 2014).

Friendship Quality Questionnaire
Peer support assess the quality of children's and early adolescents' relationships with their best friends according to five dimensions: companionship, conflict, help/aid, security and closeness.

NR
A confirmatory factor analysis, used to evaluate the factor structure of this instrument, demonstrated that these scales represented distinct, but related, domains of friendship. Assessments of reliability indicated the high level of internal consistency within each dimension. The validity of the scale was indicated by the observation of higher ratings for (a) mutual friends than for non-mutual friends, and (b) for stable friends than for nonstable friends.
Exercise Confidence Survey The total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items. The total score ranges between 10and 60, with a higher score indicating more self-efficacy. This paper argues that lower score indicates a higher perceived GSE. (note original scale says higher score = higher S-E) GSES is correlated to emotion, optimism, work satisfaction. Negative coefficients for depression, stress, health complaints, burnout, and anxiety. Internal reliability for GSE = Cronbach's alphas between .76 and .90 Swedish version -Social Barriers to Exercise Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (SPBESQ) Behaviour specific selfefficacy 6-point Likert scale. Response ranges from 1 'not true' to 6 'absolutely true'.10 items (3 for support barriers and 7 for social barriers). Examines content of intervention and specific behavioural changes.
A lower score appears to suggest a higher perceived SSBES in this paper (note lack of clarity re: direction of effect) NR