Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20959282›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010

Interventions to promote cycling: systematic review.

Lin Yang, Shannon Sahlqvist, Alison McMinn, Simon J Griffin, David Ogilvie

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
43.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

83 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 311 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Cycling infrastructure for reducing cycling injuries in cyclists.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Community wide interventions for increasing physical activity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  9. Behavior change techniques used to promote walking and cycling: a systematic review.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2013
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Mode of transport, genetic susceptibility, and incidence of coronary heart disease.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Cycling in older adults: a scoping review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023
    Article

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lin YangMedical Research Council Epidemiology Unit and UK Clinical Research Collaboration Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), Cambridge, UK.
Shannon Sahlqvist
Alison McMinn
Simon J Griffin
David Ogilvie
Medical Research Council · GB

Funding

British Heart FoundationDepartment of Health RP-PG-0606-1259Medical Research Council MC_U106179474Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine what interventions are effective in promoting cycling, the size of the effects of interventions, and evidence of any associated benefits on overall physical activity or anthropometric measures.

designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: Published and unpublished reports in any language identified by searching 13 electronic databases, websites, reference lists, and existing systematic reviews, and papers identified by experts in the field. Review methods Controlled "before and after" experimental or observational studies of the effect of any type of intervention on cycling behaviour measured at either individual or population level.

resultsTwenty five studies (of which two were randomised controlled trials) from seven countries were included. Six studies examined interventions aimed specifically at promoting cycling, of which four (an intensive individual intervention in obese women, high quality improvements to a cycle route network, and two multifaceted cycle promotion initiatives at town or city level) were found to be associated with increases in cycling. Those studies that evaluated interventions at population level reported net increases of up to 3.4 percentage points in the population prevalence of cycling or the proportion of trips made by bicycle. Sixteen studies assessing individualised marketing of "environmentally friendly" modes of transport to interested households reported modest but consistent net effects equating to an average of eight additional cycling trips per person per year in the local population. Other interventions that targeted travel behaviour in general were not associated with a clear increase in cycling. Only two studies assessed effects of interventions on physical activity; one reported a positive shift in the population distribution of overall physical activity during the intervention.

conclusionsCommunity-wide promotional activities and improving infrastructure for cycling have the potential to increase cycling by modest amounts, but further controlled evaluative studies incorporating more precise measures are required, particularly in areas without an established cycling culture. Studies of individualised marketing report consistent positive effects of interventions on cycling behaviour, but these findings should be confirmed using more robust study designs. Future research should also examine how best to promote cycling in children and adolescents and through workplaces. Whether interventions to promote cycling result in an increase in overall physical activity or changes in anthropometric measures is unclear.

Indexed as

AnthropometryBicyclingExerciseFemaleHealth BehaviorHealth PromotionHumansMaleMarketingTravel

Identifiers

PMID20959282
PMCPMC2957539
OpenAlexW3004828477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.