Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32086356›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Status and contents of physical activity recommendations in European Union countries: a systematic comparative analysis.

Peter Gelius, Antonina Tcymbal, Karim Abu-Omar, Romeu Mendes, Sara Tribuzi Morais, Stephen Whiting, Joao Breda

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention of childhood obesity: A systematic review of quality and content.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Health Enhancing Physical Activity Policies in Poland: Findings from the HEPA PAT Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Physical Activity as a Human Right?Health and human rights · 2021
    Article
  19. 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

7 authors.

Peter GeliusDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, FAU, Erlangen, Germany peter.gelius@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0002-4120-4996
Antonina TcymbalDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, FAU, Erlangen, Germany.
Karim Abu-OmarDepartment of Sport Science and Sport, FAU, Erlangen, Germany.
Romeu MendesEPIUnit - Instituto de Saúde Pública, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-3806-438X
Sara Tribuzi MoraisFaculdade de Desporto, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-6584-1316
Stephen WhitingEPIUnit - Instituto de Saúde Pública, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Joao BredaDivision of Noncommunicable Diseases and Promoting Health through the Life-course, World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe analysed the information on current national physical activity recommendations in all EU Member States provided by governments in a joint EU/WHO survey on the implementation status of the EU Council Recommendation on Health-Enhancing Physical Activity across Sectors.

designCross-sectional survey.

participantsThe representatives of the 28 EU Member State governments to the EU Physical Activity Focal Point Network. OUTCOME MEASURES: National recommendations on: (A) minimum frequency, duration, intensity and lengths of bouts of physical activity, (B) preventing inactivity or sedentary behaviour and (C) further recommendations for additional health benefits, obesity prevention and specific types of activity.

resultsAn official document could be located for 23 of the 28 EU Member States, while four are currently developing recommendations. For children and adolescents, most countries follow the 2010 WHO Global Recommendations for Physical Activity, but there are notable differences in the delimitation of age groups. 14 countries also followed WHO in their recommendations for adults, and 11 countries have additional advice on avoiding inactivity and sitting among adults. 18 Member States have recommendations for older adults, 12 of which follow WHO. Thirteen countries also address at least one special population (eg, pregnant women, people with disabilities and people with chronic diseases), but the level of detail varies substantially between countries.

conclusionsThe large majority of EU Member States either has physical activity recommendations in place or is in the process of developing them. There is a general tendency to use the WHO Global Recommendations as a basis, with the greatest variation observable for children and adolescents. Comparing results with a previous round of data collection shows that the number of EU countries with physical activity recommendations is increasing and that both special groups and sedentary behaviour have become more important in recent years.

Indexed as

ExerciseSedentary BehaviorAdolescentAdultAgedChildChild, PreschoolCross-Sectional StudiesEuropean UnionFemaleGuidelines as TopicHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityhealth policynational recommendationsphysical activitypublic health

Identifiers

PMID32086356
PMCPMC7044960

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.