Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870255›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2022

Population level physical activity before and during the first national COVID-19 lockdown: A nationally representative repeat cross-sectional study of 5 years of Active Lives data in England.

Tessa Strain, Stephen J Sharp, Andrew Spiers, Helen Price, Ciara Williams, Carol Fraser, Søren Brage, Katrien Wijndaele, Paul Kelly

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

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

  1. 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. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  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

9 authors.

Tessa StrainMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Stephen J SharpMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Andrew SpiersSport England, London, UK.
Helen PriceSport England, London, UK.
Ciara WilliamsSport England, London, UK.
Carol FraserSport England, London, UK.
Søren BrageMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Katrien WijndaeleMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
Paul KellyPhysical Activity for Health Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/4Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo limit the spread of COVID-19 in March 2020, the population of England was instructed to stay home, leaving only for essential shopping, health-care, work, or exercise. The impact on population activity behaviours is not clear. We describe changes in duration and types of activity undertaken by adults ≥16 years in England between March and May 2016-19 and 2020, by socio-demographic strata.

methodsUsing nationally representative data collected between November 2015 and May 2020 by the Sport England Active Lives Surveys (n=726,257) we assessed trends in amount and type of non-occupational moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Using data from n=74,430 mid-April to mid-May respondents, we then estimated the odds ratios of reporting any activity in the four-week recall period in 2020 compared to 2016-19. Gamma regressions estimated the mean ratios (MR) of duration amongst those reporting any activity in 2020 compared to 2016-19.

findingsPopulation activity declined substantially after the restrictions were introduced. Compared to 2016-19 levels, the odds of reporting any activity in 2020 were 30% lower (95% confidence interval (CI) 26-34%). The largest declines were amongst non-white ethnicities, the youngest and oldest age groups, and the unemployed; no socio-demographic subgroup had higher odds. Amongst those undertaking activity, weekly duration was similar in the two periods (MR 0.99, 95%CI (0.96-1.01%)). The odds of participating in walking for leisure and gardening were 11% (6-16%) and 15% (9-21%) higher, respectively, whereas the odds for team and racket sport and walking for travel participation were 76% (73-79%) and 66% (64-68%) lower, respectively.

interpretationRestrictions introduced in Spring 2020 likely reduced physical activity levels in England. The magnitude of the declines were not uniform by demographic groups or by activity type, which future policies should consider.

fundingTS, KW, SJS, and SB are supported by UK Medical Research Council [grant numbers MC_UU_00006/4 and MC_UU_12015/3] and SB is supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre in Cambridge (IS-BRC-1215-20014).

Indexed as

AdultsCI, Confidence IntervalCovid-19DomainsMR, Mean ratioOR, Odds ratioPhysical ActivitySurveillance

Identifiers

PMID34870255
PMCPMC8629728

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.