Interventions for promoting physical activity.
By M. Hillsdon, C. Foster, M. Thorogood. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005
726 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: General Health Professions, Physiology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/92a0f86e05cea00121f3228d1e1ab458328debac
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
In Physiology
In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Citations in the corpus
- Systematic review of reviews of intervention components associated with increased effectiveness in dietary and physical activity interventions (2011, background): “Four analyses in four reviews[33,41,42,48] provided mixed associative evidence (two medium (one positive, one negative), two low quality analyses (one positive, one negative)) as to whether targeting more overweight people was associated with larger increases in the amount of weight loss achieved.”
- The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence. (2011, background): “8 Studies of park use also note that ethnic minorities and people with disabilities were less likely to use green spaces.”
- Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: a systematic review. (2007, result): “Nine studies had 100% of participants complete the intervention, and the average dropout rate among the other studies was 20%—a rate that is somewhat higher than the 4% to16% dropout rate reported by other physical activity interventions.(40) Sixteen studies used the Yamax pedometer (Yamax Corp, Tok”
- Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). (2007, background): “Interventions “have a positive moderate sized effect on increasing self-reported physical activity and measured cardio-respiratory fitness, at least in the short to mid-term”.(69) Assuming an adherence of 50% in the first year and 30% in subsequent years, the cost-effectiveness ratio of unsupervised”