Trial reportBMC public health2018
Interpreting population reach of a large, successful physical activity trial delivered through primary care.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enabling health and maintaining independence for older people at home: the 'HomeHealth' Randomised Controlled Trial.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Bringing the Walk with Ease Programme to the UK: a mixed-methods study to assess the relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of implementation for people with arthritis and musculoskeletal conditions.Translational behavioral medicine · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Exploring sedentary behaviour reduction interventions in the primary healthcare setting: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Identifying recruitment strategies to improve the reach of evidence-based health promotion, disease prevention, and disease self-management interventions: a scoping review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Equity-specific effects of interventions to promote physical activity among middle-aged and older adults: results from applying a novel equity-specific re-analysis strategy.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021Article
- Using self-determination theory to understand and improve recruitment for the Coaching for Healthy Ageing (CHAnGE) trial.PloS one · 2021Article
- Equity-Specific Effects of Interventions to Promote Physical Activity among Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Development of a Collaborative Equity-Specific Re-Analysis Strategy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFailure to include socio-economically deprived or ethnic minority groups in physical activity (PA) trials may limit representativeness and could lead to implementation of interventions that then increase health inequalities. Randomised intervention trials often have low recruitment rates and rarely assess recruitment bias. A previous trial by the same team using similar methods recruited 30% of the eligible population but was in an affluent setting with few non-white residents and was limited to those over 60 years of age.
methodsPACE-UP is a large, effective, population-based walking trial in inactive 45-75 year-olds that recruited through seven London general practices. Anonymised practice demographic data were available for all those invited, enabling investigation of inequalities in trial recruitment. Non-participants were invited to complete a questionnaire.
resultsFrom 10,927 postal invitations, 1150 (10.5%) completed baseline assessment. Participation rate ratios (95% CI), adjusted for age and gender as appropriate, were lower in men 0.59 (0.52, 0.67) than women, in those under 55 compared with those ≥65, 0.60 (0.51, 0.71), in the most deprived quintile compared with the least deprived 0.52 (0.39, 0.70) and in Asian individuals compared with whites 0.62 (0.50, 0.76). Black individuals were equally likely to participate as white individuals. Participation was also associated with having a co-morbidity or some degree of health limitation. The most common reasons for non-participation were considering themselves as being too active or lack of time.
conclusionsConducting the trial in this diverse setting reduced overall response, with lower response in socio-economically deprived and Asian sub-groups. Trials with greater reach are likely to be more expensive in terms of recruitment and gains in generalizability need to be balanced with greater costs. Differential uptake of successful trial interventions may increase inequalities in PA levels and should be monitored.
trial registrationISRCTN.com ISRCTN98538934 . Registered 2nd March 2012.
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.