Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29789470›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

Physical Activity Recommendations for Health and Beyond in Currently Inactive Populations.

Eszter Füzéki, Winfried Banzer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Understanding the Perspectives of Latino Adults Who Smoke on Physical Activity: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Eszter FüzékiDepartment of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, 60487 Frankfurt, Germany. fuezeki@sport.uni-frankfurt.de.
Winfried BanzerDepartment of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt, 60487 Frankfurt, Germany. banzer@sport.uni-frankfurt.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Widespread persistent inactivity makes continued efforts in physical activity promotion a persistent challenge. The precise content of physical activity recommendations is not broadly known, and there are concerns that the general messaging of the guidelines, including the recommendations to perform at least 150 min of at least moderate intensity physical activity per week might seem unattainable for and even actually discourage currently inactive people. Here we show that there are a myriad of ways of being physically active, and provide (in part) out-of-the-box examples of evidence based, pragmatic, easily accessible physical activity regimes below 150 min and/or with lower than moderate intensity that yield meaningful health benefits for currently inactive people.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth BehaviorHealth PromotionHealthy LifestyleSedentary BehaviorHumanshealthphysical activityphysical activity promotionphysical activity recommendations

Identifiers

PMID29789470
PMCPMC5982081

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.