Effects of the SPARK program on motor skills, physical fitness, and social skills in children and adolescents: a systematic review

Abstract Background The holistic health of children, encompassing physical, psychological, and social domains, plays a crucial role in long-term societal development. However, evidence suggests that many young people engage in insufficient physical activity, which may be associated with underdeveloped motor abilities and limited opportunities for social interaction. The SPARK program (Sports, Play, and Active Recreation for Kids) is a structured, evidence-based physical education curriculum designed to promote physical activity, cardiovascular fitness, and motor skill development. Despite its widespread use, comprehensive evaluations of its overall effectiveness remain limited. Objective This review aimed to synthesize and evaluate existing empirical studies examining the effects of the SPARK program on children’s and adolescents’ physical fitness, motor development, and social skills. Methods A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCOhost (CINAHL Plus, SPORTDiscus, Academic Search Complete), and Scopus up to June 5, 2025. Eligible studies included participants aged 3–18 years, implemented SPARK as the intervention, and met pre-established inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was appraised using the PEDro scale, risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 or ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence was graded according to the GRADE approach. Results Nineteen quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria, including randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, and were primarily conducted in Iran and the United States. Overall methodological quality was moderate, with most studies exhibiting some or serious risk of bias related to non-random allocation and limited blinding. GRADE evaluations indicated moderate certainty of evidence for improvements in motor skills and low certainty of evidence for physical fitness and social adaptability. Positive trends were observed for cardiorespiratory fitness, muscular strength, and motor proficiency. Evidence related to BMI and flexibility outcomes was limited. Social skills were assessed in only two studies, both of which reported positive effects. Long-term evidence remains insufficient. Conclusions The available evidence suggests that the SPARK program is associated with improvements in motor skill outcomes, supported by moderate-certainty evidence. In contrast, evidence for physical fitness and social outcomes remains limited and less conclusive. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger, more diverse samples and extended follow-up periods are needed to strengthen confidence in these findings and clarify the sustainability of observed effects.