Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25601182›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of sports medicine2015

Is there evidence that walking groups have health benefits? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sarah Hanson, Andy Jones

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of sports medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05453084 (Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Physical Exercise Intervention on Quality of Life and Symptom Profile of Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 156 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
156citing papers in PubMed, 11 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.

NCT05453084 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Physical Exercise Intervention on Quality of Life and Symptom Profile of Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS).

TypeinterventionalSponsorAzienda Ospedaliera Specializzata in Gastroenterologia Saverio de BellisRan2022 to 2024Enrolled137ConditionsIrritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS)ArmsExercise Program
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

156 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Walking for hypertension.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Benefits of Outdoor Sports for Society. A Systematic Literature Review and Reflections on Evidence.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Understanding the Influence of Environment on Adults' Walking Experiences: A Meta-Synthesis Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016
    Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

96 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

2 authors.

Sarah HansonNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, UK.
Andy JonesNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, UK.

Funding

British Heart FoundationDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MR/K023187/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the health benefits of outdoor walking groups.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of walking group interventions examining differences in commonly used physiological, psychological and well-being outcomes between baseline and intervention end. DATA SOURCES: Seven electronic databases, clinical trial registers, grey literature and reference lists in English language up to November 2013. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Adults, group walking outdoors with outcomes directly attributable to the walking intervention.

resultsForty-two studies were identified involving 1843 participants. There is evidence that walking groups have wide-ranging health benefits. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant reductions in mean difference for systolic blood pressure -3.72 mm Hg (-5.28 to -2.17) and diastolic blood pressure -3.14 mm Hg (-4.15 to -2.13); resting heart rate -2.88 bpm (-4.13 to -1.64); body fat -1.31% (-2.10 to -0.52), body mass index -0.71 kg/m(2) (-1.19 to -0.23), total cholesterol -0.11 mmol/L (-0.22 to -0.01) and statistically significant mean increases in VO(2max) of 2.66 mL/kg/min (1.67-3.65), the SF-36 (physical functioning) score 6.02 (0.51 to 11.53) and a 6 min walk time of 79.6 m (53.37-105.84). A standardised mean difference showed a reduction in depression scores with an effect size of -0.67 (-0.97 to -0.38). The evidence was less clear for other outcomes such as waist circumference fasting glucose, SF-36 (mental health) and serum lipids such as high-density lipids. There were no notable adverse side effects reported in any of the studies.

conclusionsWalking groups are effective and safe with good adherence and wide-ranging health benefits. They could be a promising intervention as an adjunct to other healthcare or as a proactive health-promoting activity.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorAdultBlood PressureCholesterolEpidemiologic MethodsFemaleHealth PromotionHeart RateHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf-Help GroupsWalkingCholesterolPhysical activityWalking

Identifiers

PMID25601182
PMCPMC4453623

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.