Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21798015›Full record

ReviewThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2011

How many steps/day are enough? For adults.

Catrine Tudor-Locke, Cora L Craig, Wendy J Brown, Stacy A Clemes, Katrien De Cocker, Billie Giles-Corti, Yoshiro Hatano, Shigeru Inoue, Sandra M Matsudo, Nanette Mutrie and 8 more

4 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 376 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
376citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01560871 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

Effects of a Walking Program and Inspiratory Muscle Training in Individuals With Chronic Heart Failure - A Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorTexas Woman's UniversityRan2012 to 2018Enrolled16ConditionsHeart Failure NYHA Class II, Heart Failure NYHA Class IIIArmsHigh-intensity IMT plus walking, Low-intensity IMT plus walking
NCT01696539 nacompletednot on this map

Pilot Intervention Study of the Impact of Sustainable Daily Physical Activity on Health and Quality of Life in a Cohort of Men With Prostate Cancer in Sweden: Steps for PRosTAte Cancer Health and Survival (SPaRTACuS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorÖrebro University, SwedenRan2010 to 2010Enrolled42ConditionsProstatic NeoplasmArmsWalking Intervention, Standard of Care
NCT04906499 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Preventing Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis With Physical Activity Promotion

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel HillRan2021 to 2022Enrolled7ConditionsAnterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries, Exercise, Cartilage, Articular, Knee InjuriesArmsPhysical Activity Promotion
NCT05575232 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness and Usability of a Mobile Application to Assist in the Pharmacological and Non-pharmacological Treatment of Arterial Hypertension

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaRan2022 to 2024Enrolled52ConditionsHypertensionArmsApplication Group (GA)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

376 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Physical inactivity in chronic airways disease: an important candidate in the treatable traits paradigm.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Impact of Seasonality on Physical Activity: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Sustaining training effects through physical activity coaching (STEP): a randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Catrine Tudor-LockeWalking Behavior Laboratory, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA. Tudor-Locke@pbrc.edu
Cora L Craig
Wendy J Brown
Stacy A Clemes
Katrien De Cocker
Billie Giles-Corti
Yoshiro Hatano
Shigeru Inoue
Sandra M Matsudo
Nanette Mutrie
Jean-Michel Oppert
David A Rowe
Michael D Schmidt
Grant M Schofield
John C Spence
Pedro J Teixeira
Mark A Tully
Steven N Blair

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physical activity guidelines from around the world are typically expressed in terms of frequency, duration, and intensity parameters. Objective monitoring using pedometers and accelerometers offers a new opportunity to measure and communicate physical activity in terms of steps/day. Various step-based versions or translations of physical activity guidelines are emerging, reflecting public interest in such guidance. However, there appears to be a wide discrepancy in the exact values that are being communicated. It makes sense that step-based recommendations should be harmonious with existing evidence-based public health guidelines that recognize that "some physical activity is better than none" while maintaining a focus on time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Thus, the purpose of this review was to update our existing knowledge of "How many steps/day are enough?", and to inform step-based recommendations consistent with current physical activity guidelines. Normative data indicate that healthy adults typically take between 4,000 and 18,000 steps/day, and that 10,000 steps/day is reasonable for this population, although there are notable "low active populations." Interventions demonstrate incremental increases on the order of 2,000-2,500 steps/day. The results of seven different controlled studies demonstrate that there is a strong relationship between cadence and intensity. Further, despite some inter-individual variation, 100 steps/minute represents a reasonable floor value indicative of moderate intensity walking. Multiplying this cadence by 30 minutes (i.e., typical of a daily recommendation) produces a minimum of 3,000 steps that is best used as a heuristic (i.e., guiding) value, but these steps must be taken over and above habitual activity levels to be a true expression of free-living steps/day that also includes recommendations for minimal amounts of time in MVPA. Computed steps/day translations of time in MVPA that also include estimates of habitual activity levels equate to 7,100 to 11,000 steps/day. A direct estimate of minimal amounts of MVPA accumulated in the course of objectively monitored free-living behaviour is 7,000-8,000 steps/day. A scale that spans a wide range of incremental increases in steps/day and is congruent with public health recognition that "some physical activity is better than none," yet still incorporates step-based translations of recommended amounts of time in MVPA may be useful in research and practice. The full range of users (researchers to practitioners to the general public) of objective monitoring instruments that provide step-based outputs require good reference data and evidence-based recommendations to be able to design effective health messages congruent with public health physical activity guidelines, guide behaviour change, and ultimately measure, track, and interpret steps/day.

Indexed as

ExerciseGuidelines as TopicHealth BehaviorWalkingAdultHumansMonitoring, AmbulatoryPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID21798015
PMCPMC3197470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.