Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29037216›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2017

Exploring the impact of the care sport connector in the Netherlands.

Karlijn E F Leenaars, Eva Smit, Annemarie Wagemakers, Gerard R M Molleman, Maria A Koelen

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

5 authors.

Karlijn E F LeenaarsDepartment of Social Sciences, Health and Society Group, Wageningen University & Research Centre, P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW, Wageningen, The Netherlands. karlijn.leenaars@wur.nl.
Eva SmitAcademic Collaborative Centre AMPHI, Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Annemarie WagemakersDepartment of Social Sciences, Health and Society Group, Wageningen University & Research Centre, P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Gerard R M MollemanAcademic Collaborative Centre AMPHI, Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Maria A KoelenDepartment of Social Sciences, Health and Society Group, Wageningen University & Research Centre, P.O. Box 8130, 6700 EW, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegular physical activity (PA) is deemed to contribute to the primary and secondary prevention of several chronic diseases, like diabetes mellitus, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and osteoporosis. In 2012, Care Sport Connectors (CSC), to whom a broker has been ascribed, were introduced in the Netherlands to stimulate PA and guide primary care patients towards local sport facilities. The aim of this study was to explore which structural embedding is the most promising for CSCs' work.

methodsIn three rounds of interviews, 13 CSCs were followed for 2 years in their work. In these interviews, a network survey was used to identify organisations in the CSCs' network, whether they collaborated with these organisations, and the role of the organisations in the connection. Data from the network survey were analysed using the RE-AIM framework and disaggregated into how CSCs were structurally embedded (Type A: only PA sector; Type B: different sectors; Type C: partnership). A related samples Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to study how the CSCs' network developed between 2014 and 2016.

resultsAll CSCs established a connection between the primary care and the PA sector in which the average number of organisations with which CSCs collaborated increased significantly between 2014 (8.3) and 2016 (19.8) (p = 0.002). However, differences were identified in the way CSCs were structurally embedded and in the way they established the connection. Type A CSCs established the connection mostly around their own activities, supported PA organisations with their activities, and collaborated with primary care and welfare professionals around their own activities. Type B and Type C CSCs established the connection by organising, supporting, and implementing different kinds of activities targeting different kinds of audiences, and collaborated mostly with primary care professionals around the referral of professionals' patients.

conclusionsThe results of this study suggest that adopting an integral approach (Type B and C) for the structural embedding of the CSC is more promising for reaching the desired outcomes. Whether CSCs really improve the target groups' PA level and health needs to be further studied.

trial registrationDutch Trial Register NTR4986 . Registered 14 December 2014.

Indexed as

Intersectoral CollaborationReferral and ConsultationSportsCommunity NetworksExerciseHumansNetherlandsPrimary Health CareProgram EvaluationSurveys and QuestionnairesBroker roleIntersectoral collaborationPA sectorPhysical activity promotionPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID29037216
PMCPMC5644127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.