Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30485310›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

How are different levels of knowledge about physical activity associated with physical activity behaviour in Australian adults?

Sara Veronica Fredriksson, Stephanie J Alley, Amanda L Rebar, Melanie Hayman, Corneel Vandelanotte, Stephanie Schoeppe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Predictors of Performing Function Focused Care.International journal of older people nursing · 2026
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. How can we encourage engagement in physical activity among older adults in Chinese diasporas? Mixed methods evidence synthesis using the COM-B model.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 'I can't relate to it': Exploring autistic and non-autistic adults' perceptions of the Australian Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sara Veronica FredrikssonPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.
Stephanie J AlleyPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.
Amanda L RebarPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.
Melanie HaymanPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.
Corneel VandelanottePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4445-8094
Stephanie SchoeppePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, QLD, Australia.
Central Queensland University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People with knowledge of the benefits of physical activity tend to be more active; however, such knowledge is typically operationalized as a basic understanding that physical activity is 'good' for health. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether there are differences in how detailed a person's knowledge is about the benefits of physical activity. Participants (N = 615) completed an online survey to measure their current physical activity behaviour, as well as their level of knowledge of the benefits and risks of physical (in)activity. The majority of participants (99.6%) strongly agreed that physical activity is good for health, however on average, participants only identified 13.8 out of 22 diseases associated with physical inactivity and over half of participants (55.6%) could not identify how much physical activity is recommended for health benefits. Furthermore, 45% of the participants overestimated, 9% underestimated and 27% did not know the increased risk of disease resulting from inactivity as indicated by the Australian Department of Health. Participants were significantly more active when they correctly identified more diseases associated with physical inactivity and when they overestimated the risks associated with inactivity. Therefore, health promotion initiatives should increase knowledge of the types of diseases associated with inactivity. Low knowledge of physical activity guidelines suggest they should be promoted more, as this knowledge provides guidance on frequency, types and duration of physical activity needed for health.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth BehaviorKnowledgeAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30485310
PMCPMC6261553
OpenAlexW2902480702

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.