Canada’s physical activity guides: has their release had an impact?This article is part of a supplement entitled Advancing physical activity measurement and guidelines in Canada: a scientific review and evidence-based foundation for the future of Canadian physical activity guidelines co-published by Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism and the Canadian Journal of Public Health. It may be cited as Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 32(Suppl. 2E) or as Can. J. Public Health 98(Suppl. 2).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the reach of different versions of Canada’s physical activity guide (CPAG) and their impacts, including immediate effects (awareness, knowledge, beliefs, future intention to be active, first steps towards behavioural change) and population levels of physical activity. The analysis is based on eligible adults aged 18 years and older (n = 8,892) included in the 2003 Physical Activity Monitor (PAM) survey. The 2003 PAM was a cross-sectional, telephone interview of a representative population sample. Secular trends of Canadians aged 12 years and older were examined, using representative samples from the National Population Health and Canadian Community Health Surveys. Unprompted recall of any guidelines for physical activity was very low (4%), whereas prompted recall of the CPAG was higher (37%). Unprompted and prompted recall were higher among women and high-income earners, and increased with level of education. Behaviours associated with “seeking information” and “initiating action” were associated with unprompted and prompted recall. Beliefs about the benefits of physical activity and intention to be active were also associated with prompted recall. Unprompted CPAG recall, knowledge about the amount of activity required to meet the CPAG, intention to be active, “seeking information”, and “initiating action” were associated with being “sufficiently active”. The CPAG is an appropriate set of public health guidelines or recommendations around physical activity. The low unprompted recall rate points to the need for a coordinated, well-funded approach to communication of these guidelines, involving governmental and non-governmental partners and intermediaries in municipalities, schools, workplaces, and the recreational, public health, and health-care systems.