scholarly journals A systematic review of instruments for the analysis of national-level physical activity and sedentary behaviour policies

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bojana Klepac Pogrmilovic ◽  
Grant O’Sullivan ◽  
Karen Milton ◽  
Stuart J. H. Biddle ◽  
Zeljko Pedisic
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
National Level ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
Sector Type

Abstract Background This systematic review aimed to identify and critically assess available instruments for the analysis of national-level physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) policies and provide recommendations for their future use. Methods We conducted a systematic search of academic and grey literature through six bibliographic databases, Google and the websites of three international organisations for PA promotion to identify instruments that are used or that may be used for national-level PA/SB policy analysis. In order to describe and categorise the identified instruments, we used the Comprehensive Analysis of Policy on Physical Activity framework. This framework specifies the elements of a comprehensive analysis of PA/SB policies through the following categories: purpose, level, policy sector, type of policy, stages of policy cycle and scope of analysis. Results Out of 22,071 screened items, 26 publications describing 16 instruments met the selection criteria. All the instruments can be used for analysing PA policy, whilst only two include questions about SB policy. None of the instruments allow for the analysis of all the relevant components of national PA/SB policy. Some important elements of PA policy analysis, such as the tourism and research sectors, the agenda-setting and endorsement/legitimisation stages, and the effects of policy, are addressed by only a few instruments. Moreover, none of the instruments address unwritten formal statements, informal policies, and the termination and succession stages of the policy cycle. Conclusion Designing new instruments or adapting existing ones is needed to allow for a more thorough analysis of national PA and SB policies. Given that policy analysis covering all important components of PA/SB policy may be extremely time-consuming, a way forward might be to develop a set of complementary instruments, with each tool collecting detailed information about a specific component.

scholarly journals Sedentary behaviour levels in adults with an intellectual disability: a systematic review protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Louise Lynch ◽  
Mary McCarron ◽  
Philip McCallion ◽  
Eilish Burke
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Rapid Assessment ◽  
Physical Activity Questionnaire ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Activity Questionnaire

Background: Sedentary behaviour contributes to non-communicable diseases, which account for almost 71% of world deaths. Of these, cardiovascular disease is one of the largest causes of preventable death. It is not yet fully understood what level of sedentary behaviour is safe. People with an intellectual disability have poorer health than the general population with higher rates of multi-morbidity, obesity and inactivity. There is a paucity of evidence on whether this poorer health is due to sedentary behaviour or physical inactivity. This systematic review will investigate the sedentary behaviour levels of adults with an intellectual disability. Method: The PRISMA-P framework will be applied to achieve high-quality articles. An extensive search will be conducted in Medline, Embase, psycINFO and Cinahl and grey literature sources. All articles will be independently reviewed by two reviewers and a third to resolve disputes. Initially, the articles will be reviewed by title and abstract and then the full article will be reviewed using stringent inclusion criteria. All article data will be summarised in a standardised tabular format. The National Institute of Health’s quality assessment tool will be used to assess article quality. GRADE will be used to assess the quality of the evidence. The primary outcome of interest is the prevalence of sedentary behaviour levels for people with an intellectual disability. The definition of sedentary behaviour to be used for the purposes of this study is: ‘low physical activity as identified by metabolic equivalent (MET) or step levels or as measured by the Rapid Assessment of Physical activity questionnaire (RAPA) or the International Physical Activity questionnaire (IPAQ) or sitting for more than 3 hours per day’. Conclusion: This systematic review will provide a critical insight into the prevalence of sedentary behaviour in adults with an intellectual disability.

scholarly journals Sedentary behaviour levels in adults with an intellectual disability: a systematic review protocol

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 57
Author(s):  
Louise Lynch ◽  
Mary McCarron ◽  
Philip McCallion ◽  
Eilish Burke
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Rapid Assessment ◽  
Physical Activity Questionnaire ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Activity Questionnaire

Background: Sedentary behaviour contributes to non-communicable diseases, which account for almost 71% of world deaths. Of these, cardiovascular disease is one of the largest causes of preventable death. It is not yet fully understood what level of sedentary behaviour is safe. People with an intellectual disability have poorer health than the general population with higher rates of multi-morbidity, obesity and inactivity. There is a paucity of evidence on whether this poorer health is due to sedentary behaviour or physical inactivity. This systematic review will investigate the sedentary behaviour levels of adults with an intellectual disability. Method: The PRISMA-P framework will be applied to achieve high-quality articles. An extensive search will be conducted in Medline, Embase, psycINFO and Cinahl and grey literature sources. All articles will be independently reviewed by two reviewers and a third to resolve disputes. Initially, the articles will be reviewed by title and abstract and then the full article will be reviewed using stringent inclusion criteria. All article data will be summarised in a standardised tabular format. The National Institute of Health’s quality assessment tool will be used to assess article quality. GRADE will be used to assess the quality of the evidence. The primary outcome of interest is the prevalence of sedentary behaviour levels for people with an intellectual disability. The definition of sedentary behaviour to be used for the purposes of this study is: ‘low physical activity as identified by metabolic equivalent (MET) or step levels or as measured by the Rapid Assessment of Physical activity questionnaire (RAPA) or the International Physical Activity questionnaire (IPAQ) or sitting for more than 3 hours per day’. Conclusion: This systematic review will provide a critical insight into the prevalence of sedentary behaviour in adults with an intellectual disability.

scholarly journals Sedentary behaviour among general practitioners: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Mayne ◽  
Nigel D. Hart ◽  
Neil Heron
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Sedentary Time ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Sitting Time ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Cochrane Library ◽  
Activity Questionnaire

Abstract Background Sedentary behaviour is when someone is awake, in a sitting, lying or reclining posture and is an independent risk factor for multiple causes of morbidity and mortality. A dose-response relationship has been demonstrated, whereby increasing sedentary time corresponds with increasing mortality rate. This study aimed to identify current levels of sedentary behaviour among General Practitioners (GPs), by examining and synthesising how sedentary behaviour has been measured in the primary care literature. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify studies relating to levels of sedentary behaviour among GPs. Searches were performed using Medline®, Embase®, PscycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, from inception of databases until January 2020, with a subsequent search of grey literature. Articles were assessed for quality and bias, with extraction of relevant data. Results The search criteria returned 1707 studies. Thirty four full texts were reviewed and 2 studies included in the final review. Both were cross-sectional surveys using self-reported estimation of sedentary time within the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). Keohane et al. examined GP trainees and GP trainers in Ireland. 60% reported spending in excess of 7 h sitting each day, 24% between 4 and 7 h, and 16% less than or equal to 4 h. Suija et al. examined female GPs in Estonia. The mean reported daily sitting time was 6 h and 36 min, with 56% sitting for over 6 h per day. Both studies were of satisfactory methodological quality but had a high risk of bias. Conclusion There is a paucity of research examining current levels of sedentary behaviour among GPs. Objective data is needed to determine GPs’ current levels of sedentary behaviour, particularly in light of the increase in remote consulting as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Systematic review of interventions in the childcare setting with direct parental involvement: effectiveness on child weight status and energy balance-related behaviours

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. van de Kolk ◽  
S. R. B. Verjans-Janssen ◽  
J. S. Gubbels ◽  
S. P. J. Kremers ◽  
S. M. P. L. Gerards
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Energy Balance ◽  
Parental Involvement ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Weight Status ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Intervention Effectiveness

Abstract Background The early years are a crucial period to promote healthy energy balance-related behaviours in children and prevent overweight and obesity. The childcare setting is important for health-promoting interventions. Increasingly, attention has been paid to parental involvement in childcare-based interventions. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions with direct parental involvement on the children’s weight status and behavioural outcomes. Methods A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases to include studies up until January 2019. Studies written in English, describing results on relevant outcomes (weight status, physical activity, sedentary behaviour and/or nutrition-related behaviour) of childcare-based interventions with direct parental involvement were included. Studies not adopting a pre-post-test design or reporting on pilot studies were excluded. To improve comparability, effect sizes (Cohen’s d) were calculated. Information on different types of environment targeted (e.g., social, physical, political and economic) was extracted in order to narratively examine potential working principles of effective interventions. Results A total of 22 studies, describing 17 different interventions, were included. With regard to the intervention group, 61.1% found some favourable results on weight status, 73.3% on physical activity, 88.9% on sedentary behaviour, and all on nutrition-related behaviour. There were studies that also showed unfavourable results. Only a small number of studies was able to show significant differences between the intervention and control group (22.2% weight status, 60.0% physical activity, 66.6% sedentary behaviour, 76.9% nutrition behaviour). Effect sizes, if available, were predominantly small to moderate, with some exceptions with large effect sizes. The interventions predominantly targeted the socio-cultural and physical environments in both the childcare and home settings. Including changes in the political environment in the intervention and a higher level of intensity of parental involvement appeared to positively impact intervention effectiveness. Conclusion Childcare-based interventions with direct parental involvement show promising effects on the children’s energy balance-related behaviours. However, evidence on effectiveness is limited, particularly for weight-related outcomes. Better understanding of how to reach and involve parents may be essential for strengthening intervention effectiveness.

scholarly journals Internet of Things–Enabled Technologies for Weight Management in Children and Adolescents: Protocol for a Systematic Review

10.2196/16930 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e16930
Author(s):  
Ching Lam ◽  
Madison Milne-Ives ◽  
Michelle Helena Van Velthoven ◽  
Edward Meinert
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Childhood Obesity ◽  
Internet Of Things ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Weight Management ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Medical Spending ◽  
Google Search

Background Childhood obesity is a serious global issue, leading to increased medical spending on obesity-related diseases such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes. There is a need for health care services that link health behavior to risk factors, such as diet and physical activity, and that provide better advice and feedback to users, which Internet of Things–enabled technologies could facilitate. Objective The objective of the systematic review will be to identify available Internet of Things–enabled technologies for weight management of children and adolescents (users younger than 18 years). It will also aim to understand the use, effectiveness, and feasibility of these technologies. Methods We will search the Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Central, and IEEE Xplore Digital Library databases for studies published after 2010, using a combination of keywords and subject headings related to health activity tracking, youth, and Internet of Things. In addition, a Google search to identify grey literature will be conducted. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts identified from the search and accept or reject the studies according to the study inclusion criteria. Any discrepancies will then be discussed and resolved. The quality of the included studies will be assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists. Data from included studies will be extracted into a predesigned form to identify the types of devices or apps, Internet of Things applications, and health outcomes related to weight management. Results A preliminary search on Medline returned 484 results. The publication of the final systematic review is expected in mid-2020. Conclusions The effectiveness and feasibility of physical activity trackers and consumer wearables for different patient groups have been well reviewed, but there are currently no published reviews that look into these technologies in the wider Internet of Things context. This review aims to address this gap by examining Internet of Things–enabled technologies that are designed for youth weight management and thus inform further research and clinical studies to reduce childhood obesity. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/16930

scholarly journals Effectiveness of physical activity promotion and exercise referral in primary care: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Pierre Laake ◽  
Joanna Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Physical Activity Promotion ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Activity Promotion ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Exercise Referral

Abstract Background Physical inactivity is the fourth leading risk factor for global mortality. Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity are efficacious for improving many physical and mental health conditions including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes and depression. Reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity can also be effective at reducing obesity; however, sedentary behaviour and reduced physical activity are also associated with mortality independently. Despite this, most adults in the UK do not currently meet the UK Chief Medical Officers’ guidelines for weekly physical activity. As most adults visit their general practitioner at least once a year, the primary care consultation provides a unique opportunity to deliver exercise referral or physical activity promotion interventions. This is a protocol for a systematic review of randomised controlled trials for the effectiveness of physical activity promotion and referral in primary care. Methods A comprehensive literature search of Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science (Core Collection), Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) will be conducted for studies with a minimum follow-up of 12 months that report physical activity as an outcome measure (by either self-report or objective measures) including an intention to treat analysis. The authors will screen papers, first by title and abstract and then by full text, independently assess studies for inclusion, appraise risk of bias and extract data. The quality of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations) approach. The primary outcome will be participation in physical activity at 12 months. Pooled effects will be calculated using random effects models. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and for presentation at UK national primary care conferences. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analyses will summarise the evidence for the effectiveness of physical activity promotion and referral as interventions for improving physical activity, as well as whether studies using objective measures of physical activity have similar effects to those studies using self-report measures. This knowledge has importance for primary care clinicians, patients and, given the focus of the recent NHS long-term plan on preventive medicine, those making policy decisions. Systematic review registration The protocol is registered with PROSPERO the international prospective register of systematic reviews, ID CRD42019130831

scholarly journals New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults: broadening the behavioural targets

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paddy C. Dempsey ◽  
Stuart J. H. Biddle ◽  
Matthew P. Buman ◽  
Sebastien Chastin ◽  
Ulf Ekelund ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Sedentary Time ◽  
Vigorous Physical Activity ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
World Health

Abstract Background In 2018, the World Health Organisation (WHO) commenced a program of work to update the 2010 Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health, for the first-time providing population-based guidelines on sedentary behaviour. This paper briefly summarizes and highlights the scientific evidence behind the new sedentary behaviour guidelines for all adults and discusses its strengths and limitations, including evidence gaps/research needs and potential implications for public health practice. Methods An overview of the scope and methods used to update the evidence is provided, along with quality assessment and grading methods for the eligible new systematic reviews. The literature search update was conducted for WHO by an external team and reviewers used the AMSTAR 2 (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) tool for critical appraisal of the systematic reviews under consideration for inclusion. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to rate the certainty (i.e. very low to high) of the evidence. Results The updated systematic review identified 22 new reviews published from 2017 up to August 2019, 14 of which were incorporated into the final evidence profiles. Overall, there was moderate certainty evidence that higher amounts of sedentary behaviour increase the risk for all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer mortality, as well as incidence of CVD, cancer, and type 2 diabetes. However, evidence was deemed insufficient at present to set quantified (time-based) recommendations for sedentary time. Moderate certainty evidence also showed that associations between sedentary behaviour and all-cause, CVD and cancer mortality vary by level of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), which underpinned additional guidance around MVPA in the context of high sedentary time. Finally, there was insufficient or low-certainty systematic review evidence on the type or domain of sedentary behaviour, or the frequency and/or duration of bouts or breaks in sedentary behaviour, to make specific recommendations for the health outcomes examined. Conclusions The WHO 2020 guidelines are based on the latest evidence on sedentary behaviour and health, along with interactions between sedentary behaviour and MVPA, and support implementing public health programmes and policies aimed at increasing MVPA and limiting sedentary behaviour. Important evidence gaps and research opportunities are identified.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document