Education policy increasingly promotes action groups as a key strategy for student and/or staff participation in school improvement and whole-school health promotion. Such groups can coordinate multi-component interventions, increase participation and engagement, and enable local adaptations, but few process evaluations have assessed this. We evaluated fidelity, feasibility and acceptability of action groups as part of a trial of a whole-school intervention to reduce bullying and aggression and promote health in English secondary schools, which reported multiple health and educational impacts. Action groups involved students and staff, supported by external facilitators, and drew on data on student needs. They aimed to: coordinate implementation of restorative practices and a social and emotional competencies curriculum; review policies and rules; and enact local decisions to modify school environments. Our process evaluation used interviews, focus groups, observations and questionnaires to assess action groups’ fidelity, role in coordination, role in local adaptation, support from external facilitators and data on student needs, and acceptability in engaging members. Fidelity was high in the first two years but lower in the third year when external facilitators withdrew. Student needs data were perceived as useful, but views on external facilitators were mixed. Groups successfully reviewed policies and rules, planned activities and coordinated restorative practices, but were less successful in implementing the curriculum. Success was facilitated by the involvement of school leaders. Members reported high satisfaction and empowerment. Action groups are a promising strategy for leading whole-school health promotion. Implementation is supported by external facilitation, local data and involvement of senior managers.

BACKGROUND Teachers report higher levels of stress than most occupational groups. Burnout is a specific psychological condition that results from chronic job stress characterized by emotional exhaustion, low personal accomplishment, and depersonalization. This study considers associations between aspects of the school environment and teacher burnout. METHODS Exploratory analysis of baseline data from a cluster randomized controlled trial of 40 schools and 2278 teachers in the United Kingdom. Multilevel methods were used to consider the associations between different compositional and contextual aspects of the school environment and teacher burnout. RESULTS There was evidence for school effects on teacher burnout, evidenced by ICCs and likelihood ratio tests, supporting the association between school environment and teacher burnout. The factors most consistently associated with teacher burnout in our study were teachers' perceptions of the school's safety and support and student attitudes to learning. CONCLUSIONS The school environment does influence teacher burnout. More research is needed to develop and test causal pathways between the school environment and teacher burnout, and to understand ecological and individual predictors of teacher burnout and the interaction between the two.

Background Interventions to modify school environments are effective in promoting young people’s health across outcomes, but mechanisms are poorly understood. We assessed mediation in a trial of the Learning Together intervention, building on the recent publication of results of effectiveness for reducing bullying and benefits across secondary outcomes and generally good implementation fidelity. Methods Within a cluster-randomised trial involving 40 English schools, we examined student-reported and staff-reported school climate and student-reported involvement with delinquent peers at 24-month and 36-month follow-up, assessing the reliability of measures and whether these mediated health outcomes at a final follow-up. Results Response rates and reliability were good for student-reported but not staff-reported measures. The intervention increased student-reported but not staff-reported-positive school climate but, like effects on student health outcomes, these manifested only at a final follow-up. The intervention reduced student-reported contact with delinquent peers at an interim follow-up. Student-reported potential mediators measured at the interim follow-up were associated with most health outcomes at the final follow-up. Adjustment for student-reported school climate and contact with delinquent peers at the interim follow-up did not reduce the associations between trial arm and our health outcomes. Conclusion Despite being constrained by imperfect measures and by the late manifestation of impacts on student-reported school climate undermining ability to assess mediation, our study for the first time provides tentative evidence that mediation of intervention effects via improved climate and disengagement from delinquent peers is plausible. Our study provides the first evidence from a trial that whole-school interventions may work by modifying school environments and student relationships. Trial registration number ISRCTN10751359.

Background: Bullying, aggression and violence among children and young people are some of the most consequential public mental health problems. Objectives: The INCLUSIVE (initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment) trial evaluated the Learning Together intervention, which involved students in efforts to modify their school environment using restorative approaches and to develop social and emotional skills. We hypothesised that in schools receiving Learning Together there would be lower rates of self-reported bullying and perpetration of aggression and improved student biopsychosocial health at follow-up than in control schools. Design: INCLUSIVE was a cluster randomised trial with integral economic and process evaluations. Setting: Forty secondary schools in south-east England took part. Schools were randomly assigned to implement the Learning Together intervention over 3 years or to continue standard practice (controls). Participants: A total of 6667 (93.6%) students participated at baseline and 5960 (83.3%) students participated at final follow-up. No schools withdrew from the study. Intervention: Schools were provided with (1) a social and emotional curriculum, (2) all-staff training in restorative approaches, (3) an external facilitator to help convene an action group to revise rules and policies and to oversee intervention delivery and (4) information on local needs to inform decisions. Main outcome measures: Self-reported experience of bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale) and perpetration of aggression (Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime school misbehaviour subscale) measured at 36 months. Intention-to-treat analysis using longitudinal mixed-effects models. Results: Primary outcomes – Gatehouse Bullying Scale scores were significantly lower among intervention schools than among control schools at 36 months (adjusted mean difference –0.03, 95% confidence interval –0.06 to 0.00). There was no evidence of a difference in Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime scores. Secondary outcomes – students in intervention schools had higher quality of life (adjusted mean difference 1.44, 95% confidence interval 0.07 to 2.17) and psychological well-being scores (adjusted mean difference 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.66), lower psychological total difficulties (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire) score (adjusted mean difference –0.54, 95% confidence interval –0.83 to –0.25), and lower odds of having smoked (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.80), drunk alcohol (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.92), been offered or tried illicit drugs (odds ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.73) and been in contact with police in the previous 12 months (odds ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.97). The total numbers of reported serious adverse events were similar in each arm. There were no changes for staff outcomes. Process evaluation – fidelity was variable, with a reduction in year 3. Over half of the staff were aware that the school was taking steps to reduce bullying and aggression. Economic evaluation – mean (standard deviation) total education sector-related costs were £116 (£47) per pupil in the control arm compared with £163 (£69) in the intervention arm over the first two facilitated years, and £63 (£33) and £74 (£37) per pupil, respectively, in the final, unfacilitated, year. Overall, the intervention was associated with higher costs, but the mean gain in students’ health-related quality of life was slightly higher in the intervention arm. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year was £13,284 (95% confidence interval –£32,175 to £58,743) and £1875 (95% confidence interval –£12,945 to £16,695) at 2 and 3 years, respectively. Limitations: Our trial was carried out in urban and periurban settings in the counties around London. The large number of secondary outcomes investigated necessitated multiple statistical testing. Fidelity of implementation of Learning Together was variable. Conclusions: Learning Together is effective across a very broad range of key public health targets for adolescents. Future work: Further studies are required to assess refined versions of this intervention in other settings. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10751359. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 7, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Additional funding was provided by the Educational Endowment Foundation.

Education policy increasingly promotes action groups as a key strategy for student and/or staff participation in school improvement and whole‐school health promotion. Such groups can coordinate multi‐component interventions, increase participation and engagement, and enable local adaptations, but few process evaluations have assessed this. We evaluated fidelity, feasibility and acceptability of action groups as part of a trial of a whole‐school intervention to reduce bullying and aggression and promote health in English secondary schools, which reported multiple health and educational impacts. Action groups involved students and staff, supported by external facilitators, and drew on data on student needs. They aimed to: coordinate implementation of restorative practices and a social and emotional competencies curriculum; review policies and rules; and enact local decisions to modify school environments. Our process evaluation used interviews, focus groups, observations and questionnaires to assess action groups’ fidelity, role in coordination, role in local adaptation, support from external facilitators and data on student needs, and acceptability in engaging members. Fidelity was high in the first two years but lower in the third year when external facilitators withdrew. Student needs data were perceived as useful, but views on external facilitators were mixed. Groups successfully reviewed policies and rules, planned activities and coordinated restorative practices, but were less successful in implementing the curriculum. Success was facilitated by the involvement of school leaders. Members reported high satisfaction and empowerment. Action groups are a promising strategy for leading whole‐school health promotion. Implementation is supported by external facilitation, local data and involvement of senior managers.

Background The theory of human functioning and school organisation proposes that schools with rigid ‘boundaries’ (weaker relationships), for example, between staff and students, or learning and broader development, engender weaker student school commitment and sense of belonging, particularly among disadvantaged students, leading to greater involvement in risk-behaviours. Existing studies provide some support but rely on a proxy exposure of ‘value-added education’ and have not explored effects by disadvantage. Methods We used longitudinal data from English secondary schools from the control arm of a trial, assessing school-level measures of rigid boundaries, and student commitment and belonging at age 11/12, and student risk-behaviours at age 14/15. Results Our direct measures were more strongly associated with risk-behaviours than was value-added education. School-level rigid boundaries were associated with increased alcohol use and bullying. Student belonging was more consistently associated with reduced risk-behaviours than was student commitment. Some school effects were greater for students from disadvantaged subgroups defined in terms of poverty, ethnicity and family structure. Conclusion Our results provide direct support for the theory of human functioning and school organisation and suggest a sense of belonging in school might be particularly protective factor among secondary school students. School effects on risk are generally stronger among disadvantaged students as theorised. Trial registration number ISRCTN10751359

ObjectiveTo undertake a cost-utility analysis of a motivational multicomponent lifestyle-modification intervention in a community setting (the Healthy Eating Lifestyle Programme (HELP)) compared with enhanced standard care.DesignCost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial.SettingCommunity settings in Greater London, England.Participants174 young people with obesity aged 12–19 years.InterventionsIntervention participants received 12 one-to-one sessions across 6 months, addressing lifestyle behaviours and focusing on motivation to change and self-esteem rather than weight change, delivered by trained graduate health workers in community settings. Control participants received a single 1-hour one-to-one nurse-delivered session providing didactic weight-management advice.Main outcome measuresMean costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per participant over a 1-year period using resource use data and utility values collected during the trial. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated and non-parametric bootstrapping was conducted to generate a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC).ResultsMean intervention costs per participant were £918 for HELP and £68 for enhanced standard care. There were no significant differences between the two groups in mean resource use per participant for any type of healthcare contact. Adjusted costs were significantly higher in the intervention group (mean incremental costs for HELP vs enhanced standard care £1003 (95% CI £837 to £1168)). There were no differences in adjusted QALYs between groups (mean QALYs gained 0.008 (95% CI −0.031 to 0.046)). The ICER of the HELP versus enhanced standard care was £120 630 per QALY gained. The CEAC shows that the probability that HELP was cost-effective relative to the enhanced standard care was 0.002 or 0.046, at a threshold of £20 000 or £30 000 per QALY gained.ConclusionsWe did not find evidence that HELP was more effective than a single educational session in improving quality of life in a sample of adolescents with obesity. HELP was associated with higher costs, mainly due to the extra costs of delivering the intervention and therefore is not cost-effective.Trial registration numberISRCTN99840111.

Purpose: Antisocial behaviours among youth are a public health priority because of their high prevalence and harmful effects. Bullying and anti-social behaviour are associated with worse physical and mental health and poorer educational attainment. School environment interventions targeting antisocial behaviours may be an efficient way to address multiple health harms in adolescence. The INCLUSIVE intervention extends previous school environment trials by including a "restorative practice" approach, increasingly popular but never before subject to an RCT in schools. This trial assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of INCLUSIVE to reduce bullying, aggressive behaviour and improve health-related behaviours.

Purpose: Well-being can be defined as “a multidimensional construct incorporating mental/psychological, physical, and social dimensions”. In adolescents, higher well-being has been related to better mental and physical health, and educational attainment. Furthermore, these effects appear to continue into later life. For adolescents, a large part of their social interactions and personal development occur within the school environment. School size, quality, and demographics are likely, therefore, to impact student well-being. This UK study aims to investigate the relationship between school-level characteristics and student well-being.

Background Bullying, aggression, and violence among children and young people are some of the most consequential public mental health problems. We tested the Learning Together intervention, which involved students in efforts to modify their school environment using restorative practice and by developing social and emotional skills. Methods We did a cluster randomised trial, with economic and process evaluations, of the Learning Together intervention compared with standard practice (controls) over 3 years in secondary schools in south-east England. Learning Together consisted of staff training in restorative practice; convening and facilitating a school action group; and a student social and emotional skills curriculum. Primary outcomes were self-reported experience of bullying victimisation (Gatehouse Bullying Scale; GBS) and perpetration of aggression (Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) school misbehaviour subscale) measured at 36 months. We analysed data using intention-to-treat longitudinal mixed-effects models. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (10751359). Findings We included 40 schools (20 in each group); no schools withdrew. 6667 (93.6%) of 7121 students participated at baseline and 5960 (83.3%) of 7154 at 36 months. Mean GBS bullying score at 36 months was 0.34 (SE 0.02) in the control group versus 0.29 (SE 0.02) in the intervention group, with a significant adjusted mean difference (-0.03, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.001; adjusted effect size -0.08). Mean ESYTC score at 36 months was 4.33 (SE 0.20) in the control group versus 4.04 (0.21) in the intervention group, with no evidence of a difference between groups (adjusted difference -0.13, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.18; adjusted effect size -0.03). Costs were an additional pound 58 per pupil in intervention schools than in control schools. Interpretation Learning Together had small but significant effects on bullying, which could be important for public health, but no effect on aggression. Interventions to promote student health by modifying the whole-school environment are likely to be one of the most feasible and efficient ways of addressing closely related risk and health outcomes in children and young people. Copyright (c) 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

Objective Approximately 7% of children and young people aged 5-15 years in the UK have obesity at a level likely to be associated with comorbidities. The majority of multicomponent lifestyle programmes have limited applicability and generalisability for British adolescents. The Healthy Eating and Lifestyle Programme (HELP) was a specific adolescent-focused intervention, designed for obese 12 to 18-year-olds seeking help to manage their weight. Participants were randomised to the 12-session HELP intervention or standard care. The primary outcome was difference in mean body mass index (BMI) (kg/m(2)) between groups at week 26 adjusted for baseline BMI, age and sex.Subjects 174 subjects were randomised (87 in each arm), of whom 145 (83%) provided primary outcome data at week 26.Results At week 26 there were no significant effects of the intervention on BMI (mean change in BMI 0.18 kg/m(2) for the intervention arm, 0.25 kg/m(2) for the control arm; adjusted difference between groups: -0.11 kg/m(2) (95% CI -0.62 to 0.40), p=0.7). At weeks 26 and 52 there were no significant differences between groups in any secondary outcomes.Conclusion At minimum this study reinforces the need for higher level, structured interventions to tackle the growing public health burden of obesity in the UK and internationally. The HELP intervention was no more effective than a single educational session for reducing BMI in a community sample of obese adolescents. Further work is needed to understand how weight management programmes can be delivered effectively to young people from diverse and deprived backgrounds in which childhood obesity is common. The study has significant implications in terms of informing public health interventions to tackle childhood obesity.

Objectives: It has been suggested that students are healthier in schools where more students are committed to school. Previous research has examined this only using a proxy measure of value-added education (a measure of whether school-level attendance and attainment are higher than predicted by students’ social profile), finding associations with smoking tobacco, use of alcohol and illicit drugs, and violence. These findings do not provide direct insights into the associations between school-level aggregate student commitment and health behaviours, and may simply reflect the proxy measure being residually confounded by unmeasured student characteristics. We examined the previously used proxy measure of value-added education, as well as direct measures at the level of the school and the student of lack of student commitment to school to see whether these were associated with students’ self-reported smoking tobacco, alcohol use and school misbehaviour. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: A total of 40 schools in south-east England. Methods: Multi-level analyses. Results: There were associations between school- and student-level measures of lack of commitment to school and tobacco smoking, alcohol use and school misbehaviour outcomes, but the proxy measure of school-level commitment, value-added education, was not associated with these outcomes. A sensitivity analysis focused only on violent aspects of school misbehaviour found a pattern of associations identical to that found for the measure of misbehaviour. Conclusion: Our study provides the first direct evidence in support of the Theory of Human Functioning and School Organisation.

The theory of human functioning and school organisation informed by Basil Bernstein's sociology of education suggests that to gain the commitment and promote the health of students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, schools require radical transformations eroding various boundaries': between and among staff and students; between students' academic learning and broader social development and welfare; and between schools and their local communities. Existing research examining this theory has reported associations between school-level proxy measures of student commitment and lower rates of student smoking, drinking alcohol, use of drugs and violence. But this research has not directly assessed whether reduced school boundaries explain this. We piloted a new scale derived from teacher reports to measure unhealthy school boundaries and examined its inter-item reliability and its criterion validity in terms of associations with various measures of school commitment and smoking. Data on boundaries came from 101 teachers across 40 schools. Data on student commitment and smoking came from 6667 students. We assessed reliability by examining correlations between scale-items and criterion validity in terms of associations with student-reported commitment and smoking. Inter-item reliability was sub-optimal but better within the subscales about boundaries between academic/broader learning and schools/local communities. The scale had good criterion validity, strongly associated with reduced student-reported school commitment and increased student-reported smoking. We reflect on the implications of these findings in terms of critical perspectives on health promotion in schools and the strengths and limitations of quantitative research in examining health behaviours as opposed to practices.

Aims To assess whether a motivational multi-component lifestyle intervention delivered in the community was effective in reducing body mass index (BMI) and improving related health outcomes in obese adolescents. Methods 174 obese adolescents (13–17 years old; 109 females) from a UK community setting were randomised into intervention or control arms. Intervention participants received 12 sessions across 6 months, addressing lifestyle behaviours and focusing on motivation to change and self-esteem rather than weight change. The intervention was delivered by trained Graduate Health Workers in community settings. Control participants received a single 2 h nurse-delivered session providing didactic weight management advice. The primary outcome was BMI change at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included body fat (impedance;), dieting behaviours, self-esteem and quality of life. Random-effects linear regression was used to detect differences in end-point outcomes between Intervention and control groups, adjusting for sex, age, and outcome value at the beginning of the intervention. The primary analyses used the intention to treat sample. Results 145 (83.3%) adolescents completed the intervention. Mean BMI across the whole group was 32.3 kg/m2 (SD 4.4) at start and 32.6 kg/m2 (SD 4.7) at the end of the intervention. We found no significant difference in the primary outcome (BMI) at 6 months: effect estimate -0.06 (95% CI: -0.57 to 0.45) p = 0.8). No significant differences were observed for changes in secondary outcomes (all p > 0.4) between intervention and control groups at 6 months. Fidelity monitoring showed moderately strong fidelity to treatment. The process evaluation found that participants and their families found the intervention highly engaging, respectful and helpful in making behavioural changes. Discussion We did not find evidence that a motivational multi-component lifestyle modification intervention delivered in the community was effective in reducing BMI or improving health and well-being in a community sample of obese adolescents, despite moderately strong fidelity and process evidence that young people used the intervention to make changes in their lifestyle. Our findings suggest that obesity interventions with a strong theoretical basis and evidence of effectiveness when delivered by trained psychologists may not be effective when delivered at lower intensity in the community by entry-level health workers.

Background: Youth bullying and other aggressive behaviours are a major public health concern owing to their impact on adolescent physical and mental health and well-being. Whole-school restorative approaches have been identified as a promising method of addressing aggressive behaviour but there have been no randomised trials undertaken to examine their effects. Aim: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing and trialling the INCLUSIVE (initiating change locally in bullying and aggression through the school environment) intervention in English secondary schools. Design: Cluster randomised controlled pilot trial in eight schools (1 : 1 computer-generated random allocation post baseline by a statistician blind to the identity of clusters) and process evaluation. Setting: Secondary schools in England (purposively sampled to ensure diversity). Participants: Year 8 students (aged 12–13 years), teachers, other school staff and intervention providers. Intervention: Whole-school restorative approach to address bullying and aggression, involving the following standard processes: school action group formation and external facilitation to review needs assessment data, identify priorities, and plan and monitor school-level actions; staff training in restorative practices; and a new social and emotional skills curriculum. Comparison group: Standard practice. Main outcome measures: (1) The primary outcome of interest was the feasibility and acceptability of delivering and trialling the intervention according to prespecified criteria; (2) process data were analysed to explore participants’ experiences of implementing and trialling the intervention and how these varied according to school context; and (3) indicative primary outcomes (aggressive behaviour measures), secondary outcomes, intermediate outcomes and economic evaluation methods were piloted. Data sources: Students (n = 1144 baseline; n = 1114 follow-up) and teachers (n = 387 baseline; n = 336 follow-up) were surveyed at the start and end of the 2011–12 academic year (baseline September 2011; follow-up June–July 2012). A total of 1017 students surveyed at baseline remained in the study at follow-up (89%). Other quantitative data were collected via intervention provider checklists (n = 4) and action group surveys (n = 44); qualitative data were collected via interviews (n = 34), focus groups (n = 20) and observations of action group meetings (n = 16). Results: (1) All prespecified feasibility and acceptability criteria were met. (2) Qualitative data indicated that all intervention components and the trial design were feasible and acceptable to students and staff, including in more disadvantaged school contexts. Qualitative data also suggested that student participation may be a core component in improving relationships and engagement across the school. The later-than-planned project start (July) and the timing of the baseline surveys (September), which needed to be completed pre allocation, caused delays in launching the intervention, staff training and other intervention outputs. (3) Three pilot primary outcomes were examined (completion rate at follow-up range: 91.7–94.2%) and the Gatehouse Bullying Scale and the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime school misbehaviour subscale were acceptable, discriminating and reliable measures of bullying and aggression in this context. Our pilot economic analyses support the use of the Child Health Utility 9D scale with this population and the feasibility of cost–utility analysis, although this should be supplemented with a cost–consequence analysis. There was no evidence of harm. Conclusions: It is feasible and acceptable to implement and trial the INCLUSIVE intervention in English secondary schools, although a longer lead-in time is required to enable timely intervention outputs to occur. A Phase III cluster randomised controlled trial is required to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness over a 3-year period of implementation for reducing aggressive behaviours, promoting mental health and well-being, and reducing health inequalities. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88527078. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme (research), the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, the Big Lottery Fund and the Coutts Charitable Trust (intervention). The report will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: Associations between stress exposure and adiposity have been reported in adults, but data in children and adolescents are limited. Methods: The HELP trial is a randomized controlled trial of a motivational interviewing intervention for obese adolescents (12-19 years) recruited from the community (London, UK). Baseline data collection included anthropometry (n=174; 109 girls), awakening and 30-minute post-awakening salivary cortisol (n=155; 97 girls), and a validated stress questionnaire (A-FILE) completed by the adolescents (n=172; 108 girls). This study presents baseline data regarding stress and adiposity, as assessed by body mass index (BMI), BMI Z-score (UK 1990), fat mass (from bioelectrical impedance), and waist circumference. Associations between adiposity (outcome) and total recent stressful life events (A-FILE) and cortisol measures were tested with linear regression. Results: Overall, total recent stressful life events were positively associated with BMI, BMI z-score and fat mass (p=0.019-0.048). When stratified by sex, only the association of total recent stressful life events with BMI and fat mass in girls remained significant (Table 1). The magnitude of change in cortisol during 30 minutes post-awakening was negatively associated with BMI and BMI z-score in girls only (p<0.04; Table 2), but no associations were found with the total change in waking cortisol. Conclusions: Both physiological (cortisol) and psychological (total recent stressful life events) measures of stress were associated with BMI in obese adolescent girls (but not boys), and should be considered in clinical assessments. The direction of these associations is unclear, and requires longitudinal investigation.

Background The childhood obesity epidemic is one of the foremost UK health priorities. Childhood obesity tracks into adult life and places individuals at considerable risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease, liver disease and other morbidities. There is widespread need for paediatric lifestyle programmes as change may be easier to accomplish in childhood than later in life. Study Design/Method The study will evaluate the management of adolescent obesity by conducting a Medical Research Council complex intervention phase III efficacy randomised clinical trial of the Healthy Eating Lifestyle Programme within primary care. The study tests a community delivered multi-component intervention designed for adolescents developed from best practice as identified by National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The hospital based pilot reduced body mass index and improved health-related quality of life. Subjects will be individually randomised to receiving either the Healthy Eating Lifestyle Programme (12 fortnightly family sessions) or enhanced standard care. Baseline and follow up assessments will be undertaken blind to allocation status. A health economic evaluation is also being conducted. 200 obese young people (13-17 years, body mass index > 98 th centile for age and sex) will be recruited from primary care within the greater London area. The primary hypothesis is that a motivational and solution-focused family-based weight management programme delivered over 6 months is more efficacious in reducing body mass index in obese adolescents identified in the community than enhanced standard care. The primary outcome will be body mass index at the end of the intervention, adjusted for baseline body mass index, age and sex. The secondary hypothesis is that the Healthy Eating Lifestyle Programme is more efficacious in improving quality of life and psychological function and reducing waist circumference and cardiovascular risk factors in obese adolescents than enhanced standard care assessed at 6 and 12 months post baseline assessment. Improvement in quality of life predicts on-going lifestyle change and maximises the chances of long-term weight reduction. We will explore whether improvement in QOL may be intermediate on the pathway between the intervention and body mass index change. Trial registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN99840111