ArticleBMJ open2021
'Function First': how to promote physical activity and physical function in people with long-term conditions managed in primary care? A study combining realist and co-design methods.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human-centred design thinking: a novel tool for co-creation in physical activity research.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Physical literacy, health and interactive aging: a position paper.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Review
- Article
- Motivational readiness for physical activity and health literacy: results of a cross-sectional survey of the adult population in Germany.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Barriers to and Facilitators of the Use of Digital Tools in Primary Care to Deliver Physical Activity Advice: Semistructured Interviews and Thematic Analysis.JMIR human factors · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop a taxonomy of interventions and a programme theory explaining how interventions improve physical activity and function in people with long-term conditions managed in primary care. To co-design a prototype intervention informed by the programme theory.
designRealist synthesis combining evidence from a wide range of rich and relevant literature with stakeholder views. Resulting context, mechanism and outcome statements informed co-design and knowledge mobilisation workshops with stakeholders to develop a primary care service innovation.
resultsA taxonomy was produced, including 13 categories of physical activity interventions for people with long-term conditions. ABRIDGED REALIST PROGRAMME THEORY: Routinely addressing physical activity within consultations is dependent on a reinforcing practice culture, and targeted resources, with better coordination, will generate more opportunities to address low physical activity. The adaptation of physical activity promotion to individual needs and preferences of people with long-term conditions helps affect positive patient behaviour change. Training can improve knowledge, confidence and capability of practice staff to better promote physical activity. Engagement in any physical activity promotion programme will depend on the degree to which it makes sense to patients and professions, and is seen as trustworthy. CO-
designThe programme theory informed the co-design of a prototype intervention to: improve physical literacy among practice staff; describe/develop the role of a physical activity advisor who can encourage the use of local opportunities to be more active; and provide materials to support behaviour change.
conclusionsPrevious physical activity interventions in primary care have had limited effect. This may be because they have only partially addressed factors emerging in our programme theory. The co-designed prototype intervention aims to address all elements of this emergent theory, but needs further development and consideration alongside current schemes and contexts (including implications relevant to COVID-19), and testing in a future study. The integration of realist and co-design methods strengthened this study.
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.