Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29228255›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of epidemiology2018

Community-wide intervention and population-level physical activity: a 5-year cluster randomized trial.

Masamitsu Kamada, Jun Kitayuguchi, Takafumi Abe, Masataka Taguri, Shigeru Inoue, Yoshiki Ishikawa, Adrian Bauman, I-Min Lee, Motohiko Miyachi, Ichiro Kawachi

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Rebuilding Social Capital through Osekkai Conferences in Rural Communities: A Social Network Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Recognition of Anemia in Elderly People in a Rural Community Hospital.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

10 authors.

Masamitsu KamadaDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Jun KitayuguchiPhysical Education and Medicine Research Center UNNAN, Unnan, Shiman, Japan.
Takafumi AbePhysical Education and Medicine Research Center UNNAN, Unnan, Shiman, Japan.
Masataka TaguriDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Shigeru InoueDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Tokyo Medical University, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshiki IshikawaDepartment of Health and Social Behavior, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Adrian BaumanSchool of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
I-Min LeeDivision of Preventive Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Motohiko MiyachiDepartment of Physical Activity Research, National Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Ichiro KawachiDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Evidence from a limited number of short-term trials indicates the difficulty in achieving population-level improvements in physical activity (PA) through community-wide interventions (CWIs). We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a 5-year CWI for promoting PA in middle-aged and older adults using a cluster randomized design. Methods: We randomized 12 communities in Unnan, Japan, to either intervention (9) or control (3). Additionally, intervention communities were randomly allocated to three subgroups by different PA types promoted. Randomly sampled residents aged 40-79 years responded to the baseline survey (n = 4414; 74%) and were followed at 1, 3 and 5 years (78-83% response rate). The intervention was a 5-year CWI using social marketing to promote PA. The primary outcome was a change in recommended levels of PA. Results: Compared with control communities, adults achieving recommended levels of PA increased in intervention communities [adjusted change difference = 4.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 0.4, 8.8)]. The intervention was effective for promoting all types of recommended PAs, i.e. aerobic (walking, 6.4%), flexibility (6.1%) and muscle-strengthening activities (5.7%). However, a bundled approach, which attempted to promote all forms of PAs above simultaneously, was not effective (1.3-3.4%, P ≥ 0.138). Linear dose-response relationships between the CWI awareness and changes in PA were observed (P ≤ 0.02). Pain intensity decreased in shoulder (intervention and control) and lower back (intervention only) but there was little change difference in all musculoskeletal pain outcomes between the groups. Conclusions: The 5-year CWI using the focused social marketing strategy increased the population-level of PA.

Indexed as

ExerciseProgram EvaluationAdultAgedFemaleHealth Plan ImplementationHealth PromotionHumansJapanLow Back PainMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementRegression AnalysisResidence CharacteristicsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID29228255
PMCPMC5913653

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.