ArticleTrials2016
Exploring non-participation in primary care physical activity interventions: PACE-UP trial interview findings.
Article in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Recruitment and characteristics of participants in trials of physical activity for adults aged 45 years and above in general practice: a systematic review.Family practice · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Views and experiences of older people taking part in a safe-falling training program: Lessons learned from the FAlling Safely Training (FAST) trial.BMC geriatrics · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Interpreting population reach of a large, successful physical activity trial delivered through primary care.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Recruitment for a digitally based follow-up program for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a pilot cluster randomized controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- A qualitative evaluation of a novel mHealth physical activity intervention with just-in-time prompts in people living with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.BMC public health · 2026Article
- The views and experiences of people with myeloma referred for autologous stem cell transplantation, who declined to participate in a physiotherapist-led exercise trial: a qualitative study.Physiotherapy theory and practice · 2024Article
- Adapting, restarting, and terminating a randomised control trial for people with cystic fibrosis: Reflections on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon research in a clinical population.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Using self-determination theory to understand and improve recruitment for the Coaching for Healthy Ageing (CHAnGE) trial.PloS one · 2021Article
- Response bias to a randomised controlled trial of a lifestyle intervention in people at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a cross-sectional analysis.BMC public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTrials in primary care to increase physical activity (PA) typically experience poor recruitment rates and may not recruit those with lower PA levels and who are most in need of the intervention. Despite the well-publicised benefits of physical activity, the majority of adults in the UK remain inactive and, therefore, at greater risk of many health problems. Our aim was to investigate the reasons for non-participation in the PACE-UP trial, which is a primary care pedometer-based walking intervention. This is important for successful recruitment and retention in future PA trials and programmes.
methodWe conducted semi-structured audio-recorded telephone interviews with 30 participants, aged 45-75 years, purposively sampled from those declining participation in the PACE-UP trial. Recruitment continued until data saturation and a demographically balanced sample was achieved. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and subjected to thematic analysis.
resultsInterviewees supported walking as suitable exercise for most people in this age group, recognised the importance of this type of research and general practice as an appropriate setting. Key reasons for declining were: the perception of being already 'too active'; existing medical conditions; work; travel and other commitments. Less frequently cited reasons included reluctance to be randomised, the intervention's duration, wearing a pedometer, perceived inappropriateness of trial literature and a preference for a different kind of PA or for a group activity.
conclusionsWhilst most interviewees perceived themselves to be sufficiently active, an important minority did not participate due to existing medical conditions and other commitments. Recruitment to future PA trials might be improved by tailoring activity to compensate for medical problems, and adapting PA interventions to fit around work and travel commitments. Ensuring that patient-targeted literature is succinct and inclusive and that equipment is user-friendly are also important. Primary care is seen as an appropriate setting for PA trials and programmes.
trial registrationISRCTN98538934 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.