Motivation for a lifestyle change with the inclusion of physical activity in the outdoor environment: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corel Mateo-Canedo ◽  
Juan P. Sanabria-Mazo ◽  
Aleix Romeu ◽  
Josep Maria Losilla ◽  
Antoni Sanz
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Outdoor Environment ◽  
Motivational Strategies ◽  
Therapeutic Benefits ◽  
Great Heterogeneity ◽  
Explicit Consideration ◽  
Favorable Conditions

Objective: This systematic review with a three-level mixed-effects meta-analysis examined the characteristics of the programs designed to promote physical activity (PA) outdoors, seeking to identify the characteristics associated with greater health benefits, as well as the motivational strategies used to go along with the interventions. Methods: A systematic search in three electronic databases (PsycINFO, PubMed, and SCOPUS) of articles published from January 2008 to January 2020 were conducted. Two reviewers independently performed screenings, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) assessment of 23 studies. The meta-analysis analyzed conceptual and methodological variables that could moderate the benefits of PA in outdoor environment programs. Results: Outdoor physical activity PA-based programs have moderate effects on physical functionality and quality of life, as well as strong effects on self-concept and affectivity. A higher age and a male gender were identified in the mediation analysis as favorable conditions for the health effects. Counterintuitively, the use of motivational strategies was related to a reduction in the therapeutic benefits. Conclusions: This systematic reviews and meta-analysis analyzed the intrinsic characteristics of the programs designed to promote outdoor PA. The explicit consideration of motivational, affective or cognitive processes as possible mediating factors of adherence to participation is recommended both in the design and in the evaluation of the programs. Their great heterogeneity in the design and in the outcomes evaluated makes comparability difficult.

scholarly journals Do smartphone applications and activity trackers increase physical activity in adults? Systematic review, meta-analysis and metaregression

2020 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2020-102892
Author(s):  
Liliana Laranjo ◽  
Ding Ding ◽  
Bruno Heleno ◽  
Baki Kocaballi ◽  
Juan C Quiroz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Text Messaging ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vigorous Physical Activity ◽  
Mobile App ◽  
Metabolic Equivalents ◽  
Subgroup Analyses ◽  
The Impact

ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of physical activity interventions involving mobile applications (apps) or trackers with automated and continuous self-monitoring and feedback.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed and seven additional databases, from 2007 to 2020.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials in adults (18–65 years old) without chronic illness, testing a mobile app or an activity tracker, with any comparison, where the main outcome was a physical activity measure. Independent screening was conducted.Data extraction and synthesisWe conducted random effects meta-analysis and all effect sizes were transformed into standardised difference in means (SDM). We conducted exploratory metaregression with continuous and discrete moderators identified as statistically significant in subgroup analyses.Main outcome measuresPhysical activity: daily step counts, min/week of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, weekly days exercised, min/week of total physical activity, metabolic equivalents.ResultsThirty-five studies met inclusion criteria and 28 were included in the meta-analysis (n=7454 participants, 28% women). The meta-analysis showed a small-to-moderate positive effect on physical activity measures (SDM 0.350, 95% CI 0.236 to 0.465, I2=69%, T2=0.051) corresponding to 1850 steps per day (95% CI 1247 to 2457). Interventions including text-messaging and personalisation features were significantly more effective in subgroup analyses and metaregression.ConclusionInterventions using apps or trackers seem to be effective in promoting physical activity. Longer studies are needed to assess the impact of different intervention components on long-term engagement and effectiveness.

scholarly journals The economics of physical activity in low-income and middle-income countries: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e022686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priyanga Diloshini Ranasinghe ◽  
Subhash Pokhrel ◽  
Nana Kwame Anokye
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries

IntroductionEvidence on the economic costs of physical inactivity and the cost-effectiveness of physical activity interventions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) is sparse, and fragmented where they are available. This is the first review aimed to summarise available evidence on economics of physical activity in LMICs, identify potential target variables for policy, and identify and report gaps in the current knowledge on economics of physical activity in LMICs.Methods and analysisPeer-reviewed journal articles of observational, experimental, quasi-experimental and mixed-method studies on economics of physical activity in LMICs will be identified by a search of electronic databases; Scopus, Web of Science and SPORTDiscus. Websites of WHO, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence international, World Bank and reference lists of included studies will be searched for relevant studies. The study selection process will be a two-stage approach; title and abstract screen for inclusion, followed by a review of selected full-text articles by two independent reviewers. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus and discussion with a third reviewer. Data will be extracted using standardised piloted data extraction forms. Risk of bias will be critically appraised using standard checklists based on study designs. Descriptive synthesis of data is planned. Where relevant, summaries of studies will be classified according to type of economic analysis, country or country category, population, intervention, comparator, outcome and study design. Meta-analysis will be performed where appropriate. This protocol for systematic review is prepared according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-analysis for Protocols −2015 statement.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not obtained as original data will not be collected as part of this review. The completed review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018099856.

scholarly journals Physical activity referral scheme components: a study protocol for systematic review and meta-regression

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e049549
Author(s):  
Eriselda Mino ◽  
Wolfgang Geidl ◽  
Inga Naber ◽  
Anja Weissenfels ◽  
Sarah Klamroth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Physical Activity Promotion ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Intervention Component ◽  
Activity Promotion ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionIn its attempt to establish effective physical activity promotion methods, research on physical activity referral schemes (PARS) is attracting significant attention. Sometimes known as physical activity on prescription schemes, PARS involve a well-defined procedure whereby a primary healthcare professional introduces a participant to the topic of physical activity and employs prescription or referral forms to connect the participant to physical activity opportunities, such as local fitness offers. The planned systematic review will focus on these referral routes and scheme components and how they are integrated into various PARS models worldwide. We seek to identify the evidence-based core components that play the most important roles in the effectiveness of PARS.Methods and analysisThe development and reporting of the protocol follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. We plan to conduct a systematic main literature search on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, HTA, SpringerLink and other databases. We will include studies that report outcomes on physical activity, PARS uptake and adherence rates or descriptive information about PARS models. We intend for all review stages, citation screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment to be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. As a broad spectrum of study designs, including randomised and non-randomised studies of interventions and mixed methods, will be eligible, we will use three separate tools to assess the risk of bias in individual studies. The data will be primarily synthesised narratively, following Intervention Component Analysis. If the data allow, we will perform a random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression to investigate the impact of specific PARS components on effect sizes.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review does not require formal ethics approval. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and international conferences to reach the scientific community.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021233229.

scholarly journals Misuse of medication in adult substance misuse services: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e047283
Author(s):  
Rosalind Gittins ◽  
Louise Missen ◽  
Ian Maidment
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Substance Misuse ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Opioid Analgesics ◽  
Physical And Mental Health ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Treatment Services ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionThere is a growing concern about the misuse of over the counter (OTC) and prescription only medication (POM) because of the impact on physical and mental health, drug interactions, overdoses and drug-related deaths. These medicines include opioid analgesics, anxiolytics such as pregabalin and diazepam and antidepressants. This protocol outlines how a systematic review will be undertaken (during June 2021), which aims to examine the literature on the pattern of OTC and POM misuse among adults who are accessing substance misuse treatment services. It will include the types of medication being taken, prevalence and demographic characteristics of people who access treatment services.Methods and analysisAn electronic search will be conducted on the Cochrane, OVID Medline, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases as well as grey literature. Two independent reviewers will conduct the initial title and abstract screenings, using predetermined criteria for inclusion and exclusion. If selected for inclusion, full-text data extraction will be conducted using a pilot-tested data extraction form. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be reached. Quality and risk of bias assessment will be conducted for all included studies. A qualitative synthesis and summary of the data will be provided. If possible, a meta-analysis with heterogeneity calculation will be conducted; otherwise, Synthesis Without Meta-analysis will be undertaken for quantitative data. The reporting of this protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be peer reviewed, published and shared verbally, electronically and in print, with interested clinicians and policymakers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020135216.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document