Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29183924›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2017

Is there sufficient evidence regarding signage-based stair use interventions? A sequential meta-analysis.

Adrian Bauman, Karen Milton, Maina Kariuki, Karla Fedel, Mary Lewicka

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A cumulative meta-analysis of the effects of individual physical activity interventions targeting healthy adults.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Nudge for governmental change in health policy.Frontiers in public health · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Interrupting Pedestrians in Indonesia; Effect of Climate on Perceived Steepness and Stair Climbing Behaviour.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Signage Interventions for Stair Climbing at Work: More than 700,000 Reasons for Caution.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Adrian BaumanPrevention Research Collaboration, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Karen MiltonPrevention Research Collaboration, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Maina KariukiPrevention Research Collaboration, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Karla FedelPrevention Research Collaboration, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mary LewickaPrevention Research Collaboration, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe proliferation of studies using motivational signs to promote stair use continues unabated, with their oft-cited potential for increasing population-level physical activity participation. This study examined all stair use promotional signage studies since 1980, calculating pre-estimates and post-estimates of stair use. The aim of this project was to conduct a sequential meta-analysis to pool intervention effects, in order to determine when the evidence base was sufficient for population-wide dissemination.

designUsing comparable data from 50 stair-promoting studies (57 unique estimates) we pooled data to assess the effect sizes of such interventions.

resultsAt baseline, median stair usage across interventions was 8.1%, with an absolute median increase of 2.2% in stair use following signage-based interventions. The overall pooled OR indicated that participants were 52% more likely to use stairs after exposure to promotional signs (adjusted OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.70). Incremental (sequential) meta-analyses using z-score methods identified that sufficient evidence for stair use interventions has existed since 2006, with recent studies providing no further evidence on the effect sizes of such interventions.

conclusionsThis analysis has important policy and practice implications. Researchers continue to publish stair use interventions without connection to policymakers' needs, and few stair use interventions are implemented at a population level. Researchers should move away from repeating short-term, small-scale, stair sign interventions, to investigating their scalability, adoption and fidelity. Only such research translation efforts will provide sufficient evidence of external validity to inform their scaling up to influence population physical activity.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth PromotionLocation Directories and SignsProgram EvaluationStair ClimbingDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMotivationinterventionmeta-analysispoint-of-choicestairs

Identifiers

PMID29183924
PMCPMC5719260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.