Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol

Strategies for recruitment of adolescent... | HRB Open Research dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); const cookieDomain = window.location.hostname; const tld = buildTLD(); function buildTLD() { const domainParts = cookieDomain.split('.'); while (domainParts.length > 2) { domainParts.shift(); } return domainParts.join('.'); } function deleteCookie(cookieName) { if (!cookieName) { return; } const cookiePath = (cookieName.startsWith('retraction_warning_') || cookieName.startsWith('version_warning_')) ? '/articles/' + cookieName : '/'; // Yes, these three slightly different ways to try and remove cookies are necessary document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=' + cookieDomain + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=.' + tld + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; } function deleteGroupCookies(group) { if (!group) { return; } const domainData = OneTrust.GetDomainData(), cookies = domainData.Groups.filter(cookieGroup => cookieGroup.OptanonGroupId === group)[0].Cookies; cookies.forEach(cookie => deleteCookie(cookie.Name)); } function OptanonWrapper() { const cookieConsentGroups = []; for (group of OneTrust.GetDomainData().Groups) { cookieConsentGroups.push(group.OptanonGroupId); } OneTrust.OnConsentChanged(function(e) { const cookieConsentActiveGroups = OnetrustActiveGroups.split(',').filter(activeGroup => activeGroup); cookieConsentGroups.forEach(group => { if (!cookieConsentActiveGroups.includes(group)) { deleteGroupCookies(group); }; }); }); } window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://hrbopenresearch.org/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'HRB'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); Skip to content HRB Open Research file_upload Submit your research search clear search menu close clear Search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Data Guidelines Prepublication Checks Production Process Article Processing Charges Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers National Steering Group Policies Glossary FAQs Contact Blog My Account Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6" }, "headline": "Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol", "datePublished": "2024-02-16T14:35:31", "dateModified": "2025-05-09T08:48:10", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Tanya O'Brien" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Catherine D Darker" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "David Mockler" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Emer M Barrett" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "HRB Open Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 566, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 127 }, "description": " Background Physical activity is essential for youth physical and mental health, yet just 15% of adolescent girls versus 22% of adolescent boys worldwide meet the World Health Organization guideline of at least an average of 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day. As activity patterns established in adolescence often persist into adulthood, there is a looming risk of adverse health outcomes due to insufficient physical activity. A persistent challenge faced by physical activity providers, however, is recruiting adolescent girls into their programmes. This systematic review will quantitatively synthesise existing knowledge surrounding the recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity interventions and aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for optimal recruitment practices. Methods Five electronic databases will be searched to identify randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions for adolescent girls worldwide. Hand-searches of reference lists of included randomised controlled trials, relevant systematic reviews, and author publications will also be conducted. Data will be extracted regarding study, participant, and intervention characteristics, pre-determined recruitment goals, recruitment strategies employed, and the number of participants screened, eligible, approached, randomised, and retained. Outcomes will include whether pre-determined recruitment goals were met, recruitment rate, and any adapted or extended recruitment measures required mid-study. Descriptive statistics, including the median recruitment rate for all included studies, will be calculated and stratified by subgroups such as the type or setting of physical activity. Recruitment strategies will be categorised, and the percentage of studies using each category, along with their associated recruitment rates, will be documented. If sufficient studies are found, multi-variable regression will be employed to determine if the use of a specific recruitment strategy increases enrolment. Discussion Application of the findings of this review by physical activity programme providers may enhance their recruitment processes, potentially increasing teenage girls’ physical activity enrolment worldwide. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD#42023475858 " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3", "name": "Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity..." } } ] } Home Browse Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article O'Brien T, Darker CD, Mockler D and Barrett EM. Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Study Protocol Revised Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] Tanya O'Brien https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-7315 1 , Catherine D Darker https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1561-7076 2 , David Mockler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6171-8751 3 , Emer M Barrett https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-6870 1 Tanya O'Brien https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-7315 1 , Catherine D Darker https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1561-7076 2 , David Mockler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6171-8751 3 , Emer M Barrett https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-6870 1 PUBLISHED 09 May 2025 Author details Author details 1 Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland 2 Public Health & Primary Care, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland 3 School of Medicine, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland Tanya O'Brien Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Catherine D Darker Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing David Mockler Roles: Data Curation Emer M Barrett Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Background Physical activity is essential for youth physical and mental health, yet just 15% of adolescent girls versus 22% of adolescent boys worldwide meet the World Health Organization guideline of at least an average of 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day. As activity patterns established in adolescence often persist into adulthood, there is a looming risk of adverse health outcomes due to insufficient physical activity. A persistent challenge faced by physical activity providers, however, is recruiting adolescent girls into their programmes. This systematic review will quantitatively synthesise existing knowledge surrounding the recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity interventions and aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for optimal recruitment practices. Methods Five electronic databases will be searched to identify randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions for adolescent girls worldwide. Hand-searches of reference lists of included randomised controlled trials, relevant systematic reviews, and author publications will also be conducted. Data will be extracted regarding study, participant, and intervention characteristics, pre-determined recruitment goals, recruitment strategies employed, and the number of participants screened, eligible, approached, randomised, and retained. Outcomes will include whether pre-determined recruitment goals were met, recruitment rate, and any adapted or extended recruitment measures required mid-study. Descriptive statistics, including the median recruitment rate for all included studies, will be calculated and stratified by subgroups such as the type or setting of physical activity. Recruitment strategies will be categorised, and the percentage of studies using each category, along with their associated recruitment rates, will be documented. If sufficient studies are found, multi-variable regression will be employed to determine if the use of a specific recruitment strategy increases enrolment. Discussion Application of the findings of this review by physical activity programme providers may enhance their recruitment processes, potentially increasing teenage girls’ physical activity enrolment worldwide. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD#42023475858 READ ALL READ LESS Keywords physical activity, adolescents, adolescent girls, exercise, recruitment, enrolment Corresponding Author(s) Tanya O'Brien ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Tanya O'Brien Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The research conducted in this publication was funded by the Irish Research Council Enterprise Partnership Scheme and the Dublin City Sport & Wellbeing Partnership. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 O'Brien T et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: O'Brien T, Darker CD, Mockler D and Barrett EM. Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.3 ) First published: 16 Feb 2024, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.1 ) Latest published: 09 May 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.3 ) Revised Amendments from Version 2 In this update, we added further clarification to the Population descriptions, specifying that we have excluded adolescent girls identified as part of a special population due to a health condition such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that included only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams were also excluded, as athlete-only groups are not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls. Furthermore, we added clarification to our included physical activity Interventions description, with physical activity programmes defined as organised, repeated physical activities. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included. In this update, we added further clarification to the Population descriptions, specifying that we have excluded adolescent girls identified as part of a special population due to a health condition such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that included only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams were also excluded, as athlete-only groups are not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls. Furthermore, we added clarification to our included physical activity Interventions description, with physical activity programmes defined as organised, repeated physical activities. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Joey Murphy See the authors' detailed response to the review by Emma Pollock See the authors' detailed response to the review by Yumi Kim READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction Physical activity (PA) is essential for youth physical and mental health, and yet just 15% of adolescent girls versus 22% of adolescent boys worldwide meet the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline of at least an average of 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day 1 . There is a recognised gender gap when it comes to adolescent PA participation 2 , 3 , with a recent analysis from 146 countries showing that PA participation in girls was 7% lower than boys 3 . Regular exercise improves self-esteem, academic performance, cardiovascular health, and muscular fitness while reducing anxiety, depression, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and obesity risk 4 . Furthermore, PA habits established in adolescence often endure into adulthood, putting this cohort of inactive adolescent girls at risk of adverse health outcomes due to insufficient physical activity 5 . In 2013, global physical inactivity cost healthcare systems internationally $53.8 billion due to the management of lifestyle diseases such as coronary heart disease, stroke, and type 2 diabetes 6 . In addition to direct healthcare costs, there are indirect annual costs related to decreased productivity ($13.7 billion), not to mention the health-related impact of 13.4 million disability-adjusted life years related to physical inactivity 6 . These estimates are likely to be even higher in 2023, as childhood and adult obesity levels are on the rise, and worldwide obesity levels have tripled since 1975 7 . In 2016, 340 million children and adolescents aged 5–19, or just over 18%, were overweight or obese 7 . Fortunately, increasing awareness of the growing crisis of inactivity, and in adolescent girls specifically, has resulted in the development of new, generally well-received PA programmes based on state-of-the-art behaviour change theories and frequently involving adolescent girls in the design or evaluation of these programmes 8 – 11 . A persistent challenge for PA programme providers, however, is recruiting adolescent girls to join their programmes 8 , 12 – 14 , with reduced interest from potential participants being cited as one of the main barriers to offering after-school extracurricular activities 9 . Girls PA programme providers, for example, report recruiting only 10–29% of eligible adolescent girls even with multiple recruitment rounds 8 , 10 , note that adjustments to their methodology were required to improve recruitment 11 , 15 , or end up enrolling fewer participants than intended when compared with their pre-determined recruitment goals 12 , 16 . Currently, there is a dearth of quantitative research internationally regarding effective recruitment practices for adolescent girls into PA programmes. Recent qualitative research has examined adolescent girls’ perceptions of PA, the types of PA programmes they are looking for, and facilitators and barriers to their participation 17 – 20 . Individual study authors list the recruitment strategies employed in their programmes, such as presentations from researchers or teachers 8 , 21 , 22 , taster sessions in advance of signing up for the entire programme 23 , informational emails sent by schools 8 , posters 8 , flyers 10 , invitational letters to parents 22 , incentives for participation 22 , social media 10 , 24 , and more. Quantitative evaluations of the effectiveness of these recruitment strategies in this demographic, however, are lacking. There is very little evidence to guide programme providers on which strategies can increase enrolment and whether there are differences in recommended strategies based on subgroups such as older or younger adolescent age, urban versus rural populations, or the setting of the physical activity programme such as during physical education class, after-school on school grounds, or in the community. Therefore, this systematic review will present median recruitment rates for enrolling adolescent girls into PA programmes, synthesise existing knowledge surrounding strategies employed to recruit adolescent girls into PA programmes, and attempt to quantitatively determine which recruitment strategies are most successful with this population. Protocol Methods/design This protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis – Protocol (PRISMA-P) guidelines and is reported utilising the PRISMA-P checklist 25 . The completed PRISMA-P checklist is available on the Open Science Framework repository listed below under ‘Data Availability’. This review topic has been registered with the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD#42023475858). Should any amendments to this protocol be required, an update to this protocol publication will be submitted. Aim The aims of this systematic review are (i) to establish recruitment rates for adolescent girls into Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) of PA programmes, (ii) to synthesise existing knowledge surrounding strategies employed by PA programme providers to enrol adolescent girls into RCTs of PA programmes, and (iii), to quantitatively determine which recruitment strategies are most effective with this cohort, resulting in evidence-based recommendations to inform the recruitment practices of PA providers enrolling adolescent girls into PA intervention RCTs. Eligibility criteria The eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review will be based on the PICOTS Framework (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Time frame, Study Type) 26 . Population Studies that include healthy adolescents who identify as female, aged 10–19, as per the WHO’s definition of adolescents 27 will be included. Any recorded socioeconomic status indicators, such as, programme locations in areas of deprivation, will be noted for subgroup analyses. All locations worldwide will be included. Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls. Interventions Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks 28 , interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included. Examples of eligible PA programmes might include activities such as running, dance, Zumba, callisthenics, football, weight training, and more. All settings will be included; for example, programmes carried out during school Physical Education classes, programmes offered as extracurricular after-school activities on school grounds, online programmes, or community-based after-school or weekend activities at local facilities. Multi-component programmes, such as those also including nutrition advice, mental health education, or leadership skills, will be included, provided that the primary intervention is physical activity. These will be noted as a potential subgroup for comparison with PA-only opportunities. The number of adolescent girls Screened (S), Eligible (E), Approached (A), and Randomized (R), as per the SEAR framework 29 , will be recorded, alongside the number of girls who completed the programme, retention rates, and any pre-determined recruitment goals, which may be sourced from published RCT protocols. Characteristics of the recruitment strategies employed, such as the recruitment modality (e.g. flyers, posters, emails, presentations, or social media), setting, and who carried out the recruitment strategies (e.g. teachers, researchers, community leaders, or coaches) will be noted. A description of any changes to the recruitment process throughout the study will be recorded. To be included, studies must report either (i) the number of eligible girls they approached, and the number subsequently Screened, Eligible, or Randomised or (ii) a pre-determined recruitment goal and the final number of Screened, Eligible, or Randomised participants. Comparison As only RCTs will be included, all studies will include an individual or cluster-randomised control group. This control group must receive either no physical activity programme or a usual practice physical activity programme such as their typical Physical Education class rather than an enhanced or modified class. Physical activity advice without the provision of an actual physical activity programme will also be accepted as a control group. Outcomes Primary outcome(s) - Characteristics of the recruitment strategies employed. - Binary description of whether the study met or did not meet pre-determined recruitment goals. - Percentage of eligible participants recruited versus approached (recruitment rate). Secondary outcome(s) - Challenges or facilitators to recruitment identified by the research teams regarding recruitment. - Any extra measures or changes to the recruitment process employed mid-study. - Characteristics of the physical activity programme such as setting, physical activity modality, and whether it is a PA-only or multi-faceted programme. - Number and percentage of girls retained until the end of the programme (retention rate). Timeframe There will be no retrospective start date for the date of publication, and included studies may be published until the search date of 3 rd February 2023. This search will be updated prior to submission of the completed Systematic Review manuscript for publication to ensure any new, relevant articles are included. Study type This review will include primary research studies that implement physical activity programmes or interventions for adolescent girls aged 10–19. Individual and cluster randomised controlled trials (RCTs) will be included, provided that the required quantitative recruitment-related data is provided. The study type was limited to RCTs as RCTs have been designated the ‘gold standard’ in effectiveness research, with higher standards regarding study conduct and reporting 30 . Unpublished, pre-print, non-peer-reviewed studies, conference abstracts, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, oral presentations not available in full text, and grey literature will be excluded. Information sources and search strategy The following electronic databases will be included in our search: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library – Central Trial Registry. The search strategy will include database-specific terms, truncations, and synonyms combining ‘adolescent females’, ‘recruitment’, and ‘physical activity’ The full search strategy is available in the Open Science Framework repository listed below under ‘Data Availability’. Where multiple papers exist for a single RCT, the most relevant paper for each unique RCT will be designated the included ‘parent study’. If required, a hand-search of related papers such as study protocols, process evaluations, and trial registers will be retrieved from the publication lists of the first and last authors of the parent study to identify pre-determined recruitment goals, recruitment rate, and recruitment strategies employed. In instances where the recruitment-related data is partially available in existing publications, the research team will contact the study authors by email on two occasions to attempt to retrieve the remaining recruitment data. All relevant related papers will be collated with the parent RCT in Covidence and imported into EndNote for appropriate tracking and referencing. Study records Data management Studies will first be imported into EndNote 20.2 Desktop software for reference management, then into Covidence’s online systematic review management software. Duplicates will be removed automatically. Screening, selection, and data extraction will be performed in Covidence. Following this process, quantitative data will be exported for analysis into software such as Microsoft Excel, SPSS, and RevMan 5.4. Screening and selection process Title, abstract, and full-text screening of studies for inclusion/exclusion will be performed independently by two authors in Covidence; discussion will follow to reach consensus should there be any discrepancies between authors. If the required recruitment data for a parent RCT cannot be found in published sources and the study authors do not respond to email or cannot provide the data, the study will be excluded. Any disagreements will be resolved through discussion with the third reviewer. Data extraction process A custom data extraction template, based on the Cochrane Review data extraction template 31 and modified to include additional, relevant recruitment-related details will be designed and piloted by TOB. Recruitment methods will be coded into categories; for example, social media advertising, paper flyers, electronic communication with parents, or in-person advertising by researchers or schoolteachers. Data extracted will include recruitment details such as recruitment strategies, setting, any pre-determined recruitment goals, the number of participants from each category of the SEAR framework 29 , the recruitment rate, the retention rate, the method of parental consent (i.e. opt-in versus opt-out), and whether the trial met or did not meet their pre-determined recruitment goals. Whether the study authors noted any difficulties or facilitators with recruitment, whether they employed any adapted or extended recruitment measures mid-study, and a description of these extra recruitment measures will be recorded. Study details such as author(s), year of publication, date(s) and location(s) where the intervention was delivered, the aim of the study, primary outcomes, and study design will be recorded. Population details such as age range, socioeconomic status indicators, and community type (urban versus rural) will also be noted. Recorded details for each intervention will include the setting (e.g. after-school or community-based), the components of the programme (e.g. PA-only or multimodal with leadership skills or other components), the physical activity modality delivered (e.g. dance, running, weight-training), the duration of the programme, the number of sessions per week, the duration of each session, the number of instructors and participants at the first and last sessions, retention rates, and methods of data collection for the studies’ primary outcome(s) (e.g. self-report, accelerometer, objective measurement of weight and body fat percentage). As this review is not a typical systematic review wherein the effect of the intervention on the outcome could be biased by interpretation (see Quality Assessment section for further details), data will be extracted by one author (TOB) for each included study, followed by a second author performing a duplicate extraction of a randomly selected 10% of studies. If the agreement level between authors is satisfactory, data extraction will continue with one author. Any disagreements will be resolved through discussion with an independent third reviewer. A PRISMA flow diagram will be completed to illustrate the screening process 32 . Quality assessment Traditional quality assessment is designed to assess each study’s ability to limit the risk of bias regarding the primary outcome(s) of the RCT. In this instance, outcomes such as the impact of the studies’ interventions on physical activity levels or bone mineral density, for example, are the main outcomes, rather than the recruitment data being extracted for this systematic review. Therefore, quality assessment and related assessment of meta-biases was deemed unnecessary for this review given that included studies would not have been randomised or blinded for recruitment-related outcomes. This methodological decision is aligned with similarly styled systematic reviews examining recruitment rates and strategies in health-related RCTs 33 – 36 . Selective reporting within studies of recruitment strategies and related data will be reported. Data synthesis Descriptive statistics, such as median recruitment rate, will be computed for the combined data of all studies to determine the average recruitment rate for all physical activity RCTs within this cohort. Subgroup analysis will then be performed to determine the mean and median recruitment rates categorised by physical activity or trial setting (e.g. school-based, community-based, online). Additional subgroup analyses will explore recruitment rates based on socioeconomic status indicators, urban versus rural locations, physical activity programme type, and older versus younger adolescent age. Similarly to the categorisation practices used by Reynolds, O’Connor 33 , recruitment strategies will be categorised by the authors according to common themes (e.g., active vs. passive, school-based, parent-targeted). We will calculate the percentage of studies using each category of recruitment strategies, along with the mean and median recruitment rates when each category of strategies is present. We will document whether studies achieved their predefined recruitment goals, noting strategies employed by successful and unsuccessful cases. Additionally, the use of supplementary recruitment measures, like extended timelines, will be recorded and compared to strategies utilised when such measures were unnecessary using statistical methods. As per current best-practice recommendations 31 , if ≥ 10 studies are included, multi-variable regression will be performed to investigate the effect of categorical explanatory variables such as recruitment strategy category, PA programme type, and programme setting on recruitment rate. This would allow us to present evidence-based recommendations based on statistical significance and effect size. Analysis of subgroups or subsets Subgroup analysis will be performed based on the setting of the PA programme, PA programme type, younger adolescent age (10–14), older adolescent age (15–19), and socioeconomic status indicators. Discussion Recruitment of adolescent girls remains a persistent challenge for PA programme providers 8 , 12 – 14 , and yet there is a dearth of research examining the recruitment of this demographic into PA programmes or interventions. This quantitative systematic review will complement the recent qualitative reviews examining barriers, facilitators, and perceptions of PA amongst adolescent girls 17 , 19 , 37 , 38 and directly address the challenge of recruiting adolescent girls into PA programmes and interventions. One challenge we expect to encounter is that RCTs may not fully report all details of their recruitment strategies, challenges associated with recruitment, or any extended or extra steps taken to achieve recruitment goals. We hope to mitigate this challenge by contacting study authors for further details as needed and employing inclusion criteria that accept the reporting of either recruitment rate or pre-determined recruitment goals. Furthermore, there are difficulties surrounding the definition of recruitment ‘success’. To these authors’ knowledge, there are no established metrics in this cohort defining what is considered a successful, or even expected, recruitment rate into physical activity programmes outside of meeting or not meeting pre-determined recruitment goals. Metrics of recruitment ‘success’ in other cohorts vary greatly throughout the literature. In cancer survivors, the median recruitment rate into exercise trials has been shown to be 38% 33 , however this is a specific patient population and may not be representative of adolescent girls. In patients with advanced cancer, the mean recruitment rate into exercise trials was 49% 39 , but again may not be representative of teenage girls. A systematic review of recruitment into workplace physical activity interventions categorised successful recruitment as a recruitment rate ≥70% 40 , however, this metric of success was defined for a specific group of mixed gender adults rather than adolescent girls. Meeting or not meeting pre-determined recruitment goals may be a problematic definition of recruitment success, as these authors surmise that RCTs may change their recruitment strategies, extend their recruitment timeframe, or increase personnel and financial resources mid-study until these goals are met so that power calculations are satisfied. Therefore, this metric might judge most PA RCTs' successful', whereas a different picture may emerge when the recruitment rate is also considered. Post-analysis, we aim to provide descriptive statistics on projected recruitment rates for adolescent girls' PA RCTs and, where possible, offer evidence-based recommendations for optimal recruitment strategies. These findings will assist programme providers and researchers in evaluating recruitment efficacy and determining the required outreach and recommended strategies to achieve desired sample sizes. Moreover, the dissemination and implementation of evidence-based recruitment recommendations for adolescent girls in PA interventions could substantially increase teenage girls’ PA enrolment worldwide. List of abbreviations CI: Confidence Interval PA: Physical Activity PICOTS: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Timeframe, Study Type PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses PRISMA-P: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols RCT: Randomized Controlled Trial RoB2: Risk of Bias 2 SEAR: Screened, Eligible, Approached, Randomized WHO: World Health Organization Data availability Underlying data No data are associated with this article. Reporting guidelines Open Science Framework: The PRISMA-P Checklist and Search Strategy are registered with the Open Science Framework as “Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol PRISMA-P Checklist and Search Strategy” 41 . Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Dr Lina Zgaga, Associate Professor in Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College Dublin, for her invaluable insights when consulted regarding data analysis. Faculty Opinions recommended References 1. WHO: 85% of adolescent girls don’t do enough physical activity: new WHO study calls for action. 2022. Reference Source 2. Guthold R, Willumsen J, Bull FC: What is driving gender inequalities in physical activity among adolescents? J Sport Health Sci. 2022; 11 (4): 424–426. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 3. Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, et al. : Global trends in insufficient physical activity among adolescents: a pooled analysis of 298 population-based surveys with 1·6 million participants. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020; 4 (1): 23–35. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 4. World Health Organization: Physical activity in adolescents, fact sheet, 15 March, 2016. 2016. Reference Source 5. Telama R: Tracking of physical activity from childhood to adulthood: a review. Obes Facts. 2009; 2 (3): 187–195. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 6. Ding D, Lawson KD, Kolbe-Alexander TL, et al. : The economic burden of physical inactivity: a global analysis of major non-communicable diseases. Lancet. 2016; 388 (10051): 1311–1324. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 7. WHO: Obesity and overweight. 2021. Reference Source 8. McQuinn S, Belton S, Staines A, et al. : Feasibility of a peer-led, after-school physical activity intervention for disadvantaged adolescent females during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from the Girls Active Project (GAP). Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2022; 8 (1): 194. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 9. Carlin A, Murphy MH, Gallagher AM: Using the school environment to promote walking amongst adolescent females: a mixed-method study. Children (Basel). 2019; 6 (3): 49. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 10. Corr M, McMullen J, Morgan PJ, et al. : Supporting Our Lifelong Engagement: Mothers and Teens Exercising ( SOLE MATES ); a feasibility trial. Women Health. 2020; 60 (6): 618–635. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 11. Owen MB, Kerner C, Taylor SL, et al. : The feasibility and acceptability of the Girls Peer Activity (G-PACT) peer-led mentoring intervention. Children (Basel). 2018; 5 (9): 128. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 12. Strunin L, Douyon M, Chavez M, et al. : The GirlStars program: challenges to recruitment and retention in a physical activity and health education program for adolescent girls living in public housing. Prev Chronic Dis. 2010; 7 (2): A42. PubMed Abstract | Free Full Text 13. Elder JP, Shuler L, Moe SG, et al. : Recruiting a diverse group of middle school girls into the Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls. J Sch Health. 2008; 78 (10): 523–31. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 14. Lamb J, Puskar KR, Tusaie-Mumford K: Adolescent research recruitment issues and strategies: Application in a rural school setting. J Pediatr Nurs. 2001; 16 (1): 43–52. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 15. Webber LS, Catellier DJ, Lytle LA, et al. : Promoting physical activity in middle school girls: Trial of Activity for Adolescent Girls. Am J Prev Med. 2008; 34 (3): 173–184. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 16. Neumark-Sztainer DR, Friend SE, Flattum CF, et al. : New moves-preventing weight-related problems in adolescent girls a group-randomized study. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 39 (5): 421–32. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 17. Corr M, McSharry J, Murtagh EM: Adolescent girls’ perceptions of physical activity: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Am J Health Promot. 2019; 33 (5): 806–819. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Sport Ireland: Adolescent girls get active. 2021. Reference Source 19. Duffey K, Barbosa A, Whiting S, et al. : Barriers and facilitators of physical activity participation in adolescent girls: a systematic review of systematic reviews. Front Public Health. 2021; 9 : 743935. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 20. Mitchell F, Gray S, Inchley J: ‘This choice thing really works … ’ Changes in experiences and engagement of adolescent girls in physical education classes, during a school-based physical activity programme. Phys Educ Sport Pedagogy. 2015; 20 (6): 593–611. Publisher Full Text 21. Jago R, Tibbitts B, Willis K, et al. : Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention, a peer led physical activity program for adolescent girls: results of a cluster Randomised Controlled Trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021; 18 (1): 63. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 22. O'Kane SM, Carlin A, Gallagher AM, et al. : A study protocol for a clustered Randomised Controlled Trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a peer-led school-based walking intervention on adolescent girls' physical activity: the Walking In ScHools (WISH) study. BMC Public Health. 2020; 20 (1): 541. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 23. Jago R, Edwards MJ, Sebire SJ, et al. : Effect and cost of an after-school dance programme on the physical activity of 11-12 year old girls: the Bristol Girls Dance Project, a school-based cluster Randomised Controlled Trial. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015; 12 (1): 128. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 24. Cowley ES, Foweather L, Watson PM, et al. : What happened in 'The HERizon Project'?-Process evaluation of a multi-arm remote physical activity intervention for adolescent girls. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19 (2): 966. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 25. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. : Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015; 4 (1): 1. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 26. Brown P, Brunnhuber K, Chalkidou K, et al. : How to formulate research recommendations. BMJ. 2006; 333 (7572): 804–806. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 27. WHO: Adolescent Health. 2022. Reference Source 28. Hughes DC, Ellefsen S, Baar K: Adaptations to endurance and strength training. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2018; 8 (6): a029769. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 29. Bracken K, Askie L, Keech AC, et al. : Recruitment strategies in Randomised Controlled Trials of men aged 50 years and older: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2019; 9 (4): e025580. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 30. Hariton E, Locascio JJ: Randomised Controlled Trials - the gold standard for effectiveness research: study design: Randomised Controlled Trials. BJOG. 2018; 125 (13): 1716. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 31. Higgins JP, Green S: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. 2008. Reference Source 32. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. : Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6 (7): e1000097. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 33. Reynolds SA, O'Connor L, McGee A, et al. : Recruitment rates and strategies in exercise trials in cancer survivorship: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2024; 18 (4): 1233–1242. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 34. Whitelaw S, Sullivan K, Eliya Y, et al. : Trial characteristics associated with under-enrolment of females in Randomized Controlled Trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review. Eur J Heart Fail. 2021; 23 (1): 15–24. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 35. McGill K, Sackley CM, Godwin J, et al. : A systematic review of the efficiency of recruitment to stroke rehabilitation Randomised Controlled Trials. Trials. 2020; 21 (1): 68. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 36. Walters SJ, Bonacho Dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby I, Bortolami O, et al. : Recruitment and retention of participants in Randomised Controlled Trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open. 2017; 7 (3): e015276. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 37. Standiford A: The secret struggle of the active girl: a qualitative synthesis of interpersonal factors that influence physical activity in adolescent girls. Health Care Women Int. 2013; 34 (10): 860–877. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 38. Martins J, Marques A, Sarmento H, et al. : Adolescents' perspectives on the barriers and facilitators of physical activity: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Health Educ Res. 2015; 30 (5): 742–755. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 39. Sheill G, Guinan E, Brady L, et al. : Exercise interventions for patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review of recruitment, attrition, and exercise adherence rates. Palliat Support Care. 2019; 17 (6): 686–696. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 40. Ryde GC, Gilson ND, Burton NW, et al. : Recruitment rates in workplace physical activity interventions: characteristics for success. Am J Health Promot. 2013; 27 (5): e101–e112. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 41. O'Brien T: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol PRISMA-P Checklist. Open Science Framework. 2023. http://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 16 Feb 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland 2 Public Health & Primary Care, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland 3 School of Medicine, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland Tanya O'Brien Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Catherine D Darker Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing David Mockler Roles: Data Curation Emer M Barrett Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The research conducted in this publication was funded by the Irish Research Council Enterprise Partnership Scheme and the Dublin City Sport & Wellbeing Partnership. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Article Versions (3) version 3 Revised Published: 09 May 2025, 7:6 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.3 version 2 Revised Published: 24 Dec 2024, 7:6 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.2 version 1 Published: 16 Feb 2024, 7:6 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.1 Copyright © 2025 O'Brien T et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics VIEWS $counts.viewCount downloads Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article O'Brien T, Darker CD, Mockler D and Barrett EM. Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13834.3 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 09 May 2025 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Kim Y. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15561.r47212 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3#referee-response-47212 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 May 2025 Yumi Kim , University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15561.r47212 The authors addressed all comments in this revision appropriately. ... Continue reading READ ALL The authors addressed all comments in this revision appropriately. I do not have any further comments to make. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Physical activity intervention design and implementation; Health promotion for people with disabilities; Systematic review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Kim Y. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15561.r47212 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3#referee-response-47212 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 24 Dec 2024 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Kim Y. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15430.r44752 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v2#referee-response-44752 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 31 Jan 2025 Yumi Kim , University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15430.r44752 Thank you for the opportunity to review your submission to HRB Open Research. Engagement in physical activity, along with other health-enhancing behaviors, is a critical topic in medicine. Adolescent females represent a key subgroup who need to develop health these ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for the opportunity to review your submission to HRB Open Research. Engagement in physical activity, along with other health-enhancing behaviors, is a critical topic in medicine. Adolescent females represent a key subgroup who need to develop health these behaviors for lifelong health management. Effectively recruiting and engaging them in physical activity interventions is essential for fostering sustainable participation. While the protocol appears to be well-developed with detailed consideration and methodological rigor, I offer minor suggestions to improve clarity and information presentation. I look forward to reading the findings of this review. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) in addition to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Physical activity intervention design and implementation; Health promotion for people with disabilities; Systematic review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Kim Y. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15430.r44752 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v2#referee-response-44752 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 15 May 2025 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 15 May 2025 Author Response Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of ... Continue reading Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. While we agree that including adherence to the intervention would enrich the review, unfortunately, adherence was beyond the scope of our analysis. This manuscript is part of an overall larger PhD project focusing on recruitment of adolescent girls into PA programmes. Furthermore, due to the timeline of the review process, we have since finalised the manuscript and are preparing it for publication. As noted, we did include retention as a secondary outcome. We appreciate your insightful feedback and will consider it for future work. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Response: Thank you we will include a PRISMA-P flowchart in the completed systematic review. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended. “Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls.” PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended in the ‘Intervention’ section. “Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included.” Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. While we agree that including adherence to the intervention would enrich the review, unfortunately, adherence was beyond the scope of our analysis. This manuscript is part of an overall larger PhD project focusing on recruitment of adolescent girls into PA programmes. Furthermore, due to the timeline of the review process, we have since finalised the manuscript and are preparing it for publication. As noted, we did include retention as a secondary outcome. We appreciate your insightful feedback and will consider it for future work. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Response: Thank you we will include a PRISMA-P flowchart in the completed systematic review. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended. “Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls.” PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended in the ‘Intervention’ section. “Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included.” Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 15 May 2025 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 15 May 2025 Author Response Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of ... Continue reading Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. While we agree that including adherence to the intervention would enrich the review, unfortunately, adherence was beyond the scope of our analysis. This manuscript is part of an overall larger PhD project focusing on recruitment of adolescent girls into PA programmes. Furthermore, due to the timeline of the review process, we have since finalised the manuscript and are preparing it for publication. As noted, we did include retention as a secondary outcome. We appreciate your insightful feedback and will consider it for future work. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Response: Thank you we will include a PRISMA-P flowchart in the completed systematic review. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended. “Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls.” PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended in the ‘Intervention’ section. “Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included.” Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. While we agree that including adherence to the intervention would enrich the review, unfortunately, adherence was beyond the scope of our analysis. This manuscript is part of an overall larger PhD project focusing on recruitment of adolescent girls into PA programmes. Furthermore, due to the timeline of the review process, we have since finalised the manuscript and are preparing it for publication. As noted, we did include retention as a secondary outcome. We appreciate your insightful feedback and will consider it for future work. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Response: Thank you we will include a PRISMA-P flowchart in the completed systematic review. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended. “Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls.” PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended in the ‘Intervention’ section. “Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included.” Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 16 Feb 2024 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Pollock E. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r42534 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-42534 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 31 Oct 2024 Emma Pollock , The University of Newcastle School of Medicine and Public Health, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r42534 Title: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol Summary: Thank you for the opportunity to review this well-written manuscript. This systematic review protocol will examine recruitment strategies for engaging adolescent ... Continue reading READ ALL Title: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol Summary: Thank you for the opportunity to review this well-written manuscript. This systematic review protocol will examine recruitment strategies for engaging adolescent girls in physical activity interventions, addressing a critical need as only 15% meet the WHO's physical activity guideline. By synthesising data from randomised controlled trials, it will assess recruitment rates, strategies, and participant retention. Descriptive statistics will explore the effectiveness of various recruitment methods. The findings aim to guide program providers on optimising recruitment, ultimately supporting more girls in meeting physical activity recommendations that can lead to improved lifelong health. To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Physical activity in children and adolescents; girls' physical activity levels and sport participation; School- and community-based physical activity interventions; Physical Education (PE); implementation and sustainment of physical activity programs. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Pollock E. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r42534 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-42534 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 24 Dec 2024 Author Response Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. As you have suggested, we will make note of the recruitment strategy setting in hopes of identifying which environments are most effective. The manuscript has been updated accordingly. Comment 2: While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. While we will be reporting on retention as a secondary outcome, strategies to maintain retention are outside the scope of this current review. Depending on our findings, however, we will likely be including recommendations for future research around retention, as you have suggested. Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. As you have suggested, we will make note of the recruitment strategy setting in hopes of identifying which environments are most effective. The manuscript has been updated accordingly. Comment 2: While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. While we will be reporting on retention as a secondary outcome, strategies to maintain retention are outside the scope of this current review. Depending on our findings, however, we will likely be including recommendations for future research around retention, as you have suggested. Competing Interests: None. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 24 Dec 2024 Author Response Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. As you have suggested, we will make note of the recruitment strategy setting in hopes of identifying which environments are most effective. The manuscript has been updated accordingly. Comment 2: While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. While we will be reporting on retention as a secondary outcome, strategies to maintain retention are outside the scope of this current review. Depending on our findings, however, we will likely be including recommendations for future research around retention, as you have suggested. Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. As you have suggested, we will make note of the recruitment strategy setting in hopes of identifying which environments are most effective. The manuscript has been updated accordingly. Comment 2: While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. While we will be reporting on retention as a secondary outcome, strategies to maintain retention are outside the scope of this current review. Depending on our findings, however, we will likely be including recommendations for future research around retention, as you have suggested. Competing Interests: None. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Murphy J. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r38574 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-38574 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 11 May 2024 Joey Murphy , Centre for Exercise, Nutrition and Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r38574 Thank you for inviting me to review your work. This is well written and there is clear value in completing this systematic review. Some minor comments/suggestions below. Best of luck with this work. Abstract and Introduction ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for inviting me to review your work. This is well written and there is clear value in completing this systematic review. Some minor comments/suggestions below. Best of luck with this work. Abstract and Introduction The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Protocol Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Physical activity and public health, implementation research, systematic literature review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Murphy J. Reviewer Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r38574 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-38574 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 24 Dec 2024 Author Response Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. We have updated the manuscript as you have suggested. Protocol Comment 2: Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that this cohort can be challenging to engage and would benefit from physical activity initiatives. For this review, we have focused on the 'typical' adolescent girl, which may include those with overweight or obesity, but have excluded cohorts that exclusively comprise 'special populations' to limit the project's scope. Comment 3: The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Response: This is an excellent suggestion and we have updated the protocol accordingly. Comment 4: Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Response: Thank you for highlighting this oversight regarding access to the search strategy. Boolean operators were used in its development, and it was previously included in Additional File 2. However, as HRB Open no longer publishes supplementary material, we have updated the Open Science Framework repository with the search strategy with this now included. The link to this repository has been included here for your convenience: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 . Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. We have updated the manuscript as you have suggested. Protocol Comment 2: Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that this cohort can be challenging to engage and would benefit from physical activity initiatives. For this review, we have focused on the 'typical' adolescent girl, which may include those with overweight or obesity, but have excluded cohorts that exclusively comprise 'special populations' to limit the project's scope. Comment 3: The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Response: This is an excellent suggestion and we have updated the protocol accordingly. Comment 4: Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Response: Thank you for highlighting this oversight regarding access to the search strategy. Boolean operators were used in its development, and it was previously included in Additional File 2. However, as HRB Open no longer publishes supplementary material, we have updated the Open Science Framework repository with the search strategy with this now included. The link to this repository has been included here for your convenience: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 . Competing Interests: None. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien , Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland 24 Dec 2024 Author Response Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: ... Continue reading Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. We have updated the manuscript as you have suggested. Protocol Comment 2: Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that this cohort can be challenging to engage and would benefit from physical activity initiatives. For this review, we have focused on the 'typical' adolescent girl, which may include those with overweight or obesity, but have excluded cohorts that exclusively comprise 'special populations' to limit the project's scope. Comment 3: The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Response: This is an excellent suggestion and we have updated the protocol accordingly. Comment 4: Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Response: Thank you for highlighting this oversight regarding access to the search strategy. Boolean operators were used in its development, and it was previously included in Additional File 2. However, as HRB Open no longer publishes supplementary material, we have updated the Open Science Framework repository with the search strategy with this now included. The link to this repository has been included here for your convenience: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 . Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. We have updated the manuscript as you have suggested. Protocol Comment 2: Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that this cohort can be challenging to engage and would benefit from physical activity initiatives. For this review, we have focused on the 'typical' adolescent girl, which may include those with overweight or obesity, but have excluded cohorts that exclusively comprise 'special populations' to limit the project's scope. Comment 3: The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Response: This is an excellent suggestion and we have updated the protocol accordingly. Comment 4: Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Response: Thank you for highlighting this oversight regarding access to the search strategy. Boolean operators were used in its development, and it was previously included in Additional File 2. However, as HRB Open no longer publishes supplementary material, we have updated the Open Science Framework repository with the search strategy with this now included. The link to this repository has been included here for your convenience: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 . Competing Interests: None. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 16 Feb 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 3 (revision) 09 May 25 read Version 2 (revision) 24 Dec 24 read Version 1 16 Feb 24 read read Joey Murphy , University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Emma Pollock , The University of Newcastle School of Medicine and Public Health, Callaghan, Australia Yumi Kim , University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Kim Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 May 2025 | for Version 3 Yumi Kim , University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA 0 Views copyright © 2025 Kim Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The authors addressed all comments in this revision appropriately. I do not have any further comments to make. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Physical activity intervention design and implementation; Health promotion for people with disabilities; Systematic review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Kim Y. Peer Review Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15561.r47212) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3#referee-response-47212 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Kim Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 31 Jan 2025 | for Version 2 Yumi Kim , University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA 0 Views copyright © 2025 Kim Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for the opportunity to review your submission to HRB Open Research. Engagement in physical activity, along with other health-enhancing behaviors, is a critical topic in medicine. Adolescent females represent a key subgroup who need to develop health these behaviors for lifelong health management. Effectively recruiting and engaging them in physical activity interventions is essential for fostering sustainable participation. While the protocol appears to be well-developed with detailed consideration and methodological rigor, I offer minor suggestions to improve clarity and information presentation. I look forward to reading the findings of this review. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) in addition to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Physical activity intervention design and implementation; Health promotion for people with disabilities; Systematic review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 15 May 2025 Tanya O'Brien, Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland Thank you for your very helpful suggestions. We have addressed each comment below. Aims While the focus on recruitment rates is well articulated, I suggest broadening the scope of the review to include additional response rates, such as adherence to the intervention and retention to follow-up. This expansion could be reflected in the aims section. Currently, Aim 1 appears to be solely focused on recruitment rates, but in the "Intervention" subsection, the authors indicate an intent to report adherence and retention rates. To clarify this point, Aim 1 could be reframed to encompass overall response rates, including recruitment, adherence, and retention. If you are willing to take this suggestion above, to enhance distinction, Aim 2 could specifically address the synthesis of the recruitment strategies and identification of successful recruitment strategies, while Aim 3 could concentrate on strategies that enhance adherence and retention. This revision would enrich the review’s narrative and provide a more comprehensive understanding of program effectiveness beyond recruitment alone. Response: Thank you for this constructive suggestion. While we agree that including adherence to the intervention would enrich the review, unfortunately, adherence was beyond the scope of our analysis. This manuscript is part of an overall larger PhD project focusing on recruitment of adolescent girls into PA programmes. Furthermore, due to the timeline of the review process, we have since finalised the manuscript and are preparing it for publication. As noted, we did include retention as a secondary outcome. We appreciate your insightful feedback and will consider it for future work. Protocol I recommend adding a PRISMA-P flowchart (or diagram) to the checklist, as a visual supplement can offer a clear snapshot of the study selection process. Response: Thank you we will include a PRISMA-P flowchart in the completed systematic review. Population The last two sentences of this section could be revised for clarity. For instance, you may provide the listed conditions as examples, such as: "... identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions." Then, I would separate the exclusion of athletic cohorts into a new sentence and explicitly state the justification for this exclusion. Additionally, if clinical trials including mixed-gender programs (boys and girls together) are to be excluded from the final synthesis, this should be explicitly stated. Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended. “Studies that include adolescents who do not identify as female, who are outside the included age range, or who have been identified as a special population due to a health condition will be excluded, such as overweight, obesity, or other relevant health conditions. Studies that include only athletic cohorts from specific sports teams, for example, will be excluded, as athlete-only groups are also not representative of the typical population of adolescent girls.” PICOTS - Timeframe I appreciate that the study is structured using the PICOTS framework. To enhance clarity, I suggest specifying the duration of interventions under this subheading. It would be helpful to define the minimum criteria for an intervention. For example, if a program is delivered only once or over a brief period (e.g., one week), followed by post-intervention measures, would it still be included in the review? Response: Thank you for this thoughtful suggestion. We have updated the manuscript as you have recommended in the ‘Intervention’ section. “Any PA programmes, defined for the purposes of this review as organised, repeated PA activities, which may be online, community, or school-based programmes that provide adolescent girl-only physical activity opportunities, will be included. As physical adaptations to PA programmes have been shown to require a minimum of 2-4 weeks [1], interventions must have had a minimum of 4 weeks’ length to be included.” View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Kim Y. Peer Review Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15430.r44752) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v2#referee-response-44752 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Pollock E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 31 Oct 2024 | for Version 1 Emma Pollock , The University of Newcastle School of Medicine and Public Health, Callaghan, New South Wales, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2024 Pollock E. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Title: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol Summary: Thank you for the opportunity to review this well-written manuscript. This systematic review protocol will examine recruitment strategies for engaging adolescent girls in physical activity interventions, addressing a critical need as only 15% meet the WHO's physical activity guideline. By synthesising data from randomised controlled trials, it will assess recruitment rates, strategies, and participant retention. Descriptive statistics will explore the effectiveness of various recruitment methods. The findings aim to guide program providers on optimising recruitment, ultimately supporting more girls in meeting physical activity recommendations that can lead to improved lifelong health. To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Physical activity in children and adolescents; girls' physical activity levels and sport participation; School- and community-based physical activity interventions; Physical Education (PE); implementation and sustainment of physical activity programs. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien, Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 2: Comment 1: To improve the quality of the manuscript, the authors could consider the following: Although this information may not be available in many studies, including the distribution setting of recruitment strategies (e.g., There may be differences in effectiveness depending on whether a flyer is handed directly to a student by a teacher during class time versus distributed at a P&C meeting) and the intended target audience of the recruitment material (e.g., adolescent girls directly or their parents/caregivers) as key characteristics could provide valuable insights. This approach would help identify which environments (e.g., schools, community, online platforms) and target audiences are most effective in engaging adolescent girls in physical activity programs. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. As you have suggested, we will make note of the recruitment strategy setting in hopes of identifying which environments are most effective. The manuscript has been updated accordingly. Comment 2: While it may be beyond the scope of this study, it could be valuable to identify whether any specific retention strategies were implemented. Although the secondary aim includes examining any additional measures or adjustments to recruitment, understanding whether retention strategies were planned—particularly for longer-duration projects—could provide further insights into sustaining participant engagement. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. While we will be reporting on retention as a secondary outcome, strategies to maintain retention are outside the scope of this current review. Depending on our findings, however, we will likely be including recommendations for future research around retention, as you have suggested. View more View less Competing Interests None. reply Respond Report a concern Pollock E. Peer Review Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r42534) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-42534 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Murphy J. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 11 May 2024 | for Version 1 Joey Murphy , Centre for Exercise, Nutrition and Health Sciences, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK 0 Views copyright © 2024 Murphy J. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for inviting me to review your work. This is well written and there is clear value in completing this systematic review. Some minor comments/suggestions below. Best of luck with this work. Abstract and Introduction The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Protocol Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Physical activity and public health, implementation research, systematic literature review methods. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 24 Dec 2024 Tanya O'Brien, Physiotherapy, The University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland Dear Reviewer, thank you for your very helpful and insightful comments. We have updated our manuscript accordingly, with the following revisions. Reviewer 1: Comment 1: The authors state the WHO guideline as “60 minutes of MVPA per day”. I realise this is how it is quoted in the WHO news release, however, would recommend using an “average of 60 minutes of MVPA per day” so that it aligns with the current WHO guidelines. Response: Thank you for this very helpful comment. We have updated the manuscript as you have suggested. Protocol Comment 2: Can the authors explain why they are excluding studies that include only overweight or obese cohorts? These would be seen as “hard to reach” and could gain the greatest benefit in physical activity engagement – so it seems like a missed opportunity. Response: Thank you for your insightful comment. We agree that this cohort can be challenging to engage and would benefit from physical activity initiatives. For this review, we have focused on the 'typical' adolescent girl, which may include those with overweight or obesity, but have excluded cohorts that exclusively comprise 'special populations' to limit the project's scope. Comment 3: The secondary outcomes are interested in highlighting challenges identified regarding recruitment, which is great. However, it would also be useful to highlight recruitment facilitators noted in studies as this can help share good practice. Response: This is an excellent suggestion and we have updated the protocol accordingly. Comment 4: Will Boolean operators be used to develop the final search strategy? If so, I would encourage adding to the protocol so it is clear how the search strategy will be developed. This may be available in Additional File 2, but I can’t access. Response: Thank you for highlighting this oversight regarding access to the search strategy. Boolean operators were used in its development, and it was previously included in Additional File 2. However, as HRB Open no longer publishes supplementary material, we have updated the Open Science Framework repository with the search strategy with this now included. The link to this repository has been included here for your convenience: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YAEW8 . View more View less Competing Interests None. reply Respond Report a concern Murphy J. Peer Review Report For: Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review protocol [version 3; peer review: 3 approved] . HRB Open Res 2025, 7 :6 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15158.r38574) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v1#referee-response-38574 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with HRB Open Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Strategies for recruitment of adolescent...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('O'Brien T et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6", templates : { twitter : "Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical.... O'Brien T et al., published by " + "@HRBOpenRes" + ", https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/7-6/v3" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/13834/15561") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "15561"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "40455": 0, "40456": 0, "40457": 0, "40458": 0, "40459": 0, "40460": 0, "40461": 0, "40462": 0, "40463": 0, "40464": 0, "40726": 0, "40727": 0, "40728": 0, "40729": 0, "42525": 0, "42526": 0, "42527": 0, "42528": 0, "42529": 0, "42530": 0, "42531": 0, "42532": 0, "42533": 0, "42534": 40, "44858": 0, "44859": 0, "44860": 0, "44861": 0, "44862": 0, "44863": 0, "44864": 0, "44865": 0, "44866": 0, "44867": 0, "39237": 0, "39238": 0, "39239": 0, "39240": 0, "44617": 0, "39241": 0, "44618": 0, "39242": 0, "44619": 0, "39243": 0, "44620": 0, "39244": 0, "44621": 0, "39245": 0, "44622": 0, "39246": 0, "44623": 0, "44624": 0, "44625": 0, "44626": 0, "44393": 0, "44394": 0, "47210": 0, "47211": 0, "47212": 11, "38572": 0, "38573": 0, "38574": 40, "38575": 0, "38576": 0, "38577": 0, "38578": 0, "38579": 0, "38580": 0, "38581": 0, "44749": 0, "44750": 0, "41934": 0, "44751": 0, "41935": 0, "44752": 35, "41936": 0, "44753": 0, "41937": 0, "44754": 0, "41938": 0, "44755": 0, "41939": 0, "44756": 0, "44500": 0, "41940": 0, "44757": 0, "44501": 0, "41941": 0, "44758": 0, "44502": 0, "41942": 0, "44503": 0, "41943": 0, "44504": 0, "44505": 0, "44506": 0, "44507": 0, "44508": 0, "39667": 0, "39668": 0, "39669": 0, "39670": 0, "39671": 0, "39672": 0, "39673": 0, "39674": 0, "39675": 0, "39676": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "ae3f5c97-27b8-4959-a4c7-7fa18bce2b08"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); Are you a HRB-funded researcher? Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all HRB grantholders or people working on a HRB-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from HRB Open Research. First Name * You must provide your first name Last Name * You must provide your last name Email * You must provide a valid email address Institution You must provide an institution. Submit Thank you! We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to HRB Open Research HRB Open Research Browse How to Publish About Contact RSS Cookie Notice Privacy Notice Legal Submit Your Research © F1000 Research Limited and its licensors ISSN 2515-4826 | Legal background var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "hrb", displayName: "HRB Open Research", hostName: "hrbopenresearch.org", id: "5", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]" }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); }); (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument||a.contentWindow.document;if(b){var d=b.createElement('script');d.innerHTML="window.__CF$cv$params={r:'a0107e57cbab593a',t:'MTc3OTY2OTY3Ng=='};var a=document.createElement('script');a.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js';document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(a);";b.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(d)}}if(document.body){var a=document.createElement('iframe');a.height=1;a.width=1;a.style.position='absolute';a.style.top=0;a.style.left=0;a.style.border='none';a.style.visibility='hidden';document.body.appendChild(a);if('loading'!==document.readyState)c();else if(window.addEventListener)document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',c);else{var e=document.onreadystatechange||function(){};document.onreadystatechange=function(b){e(b);'loading'!==document.readyState&&(document.onreadystatechange=e,c())}}}})();