Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35354448›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

Why some do but too many don't? Barriers and enablers to physical activity in regional Tasmania - an exploratory, mixed-methods study.

Sisitha Jayasinghe, Robert Soward, Timothy P Holloway, Kira A E Patterson, Kiran D K Ahuja, Roger Hughes, Nuala M Byrne, Andrew P Hills

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sisitha JayasingheCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia. sisitha.jayasinghe@utas.edu.au.
Robert SowardCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Timothy P HollowayCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Kira A E PattersonCollege of Arts, Law and Education, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Kiran D K AhujaCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Roger HughesCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Nuala M ByrneCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Andrew P HillsCollege of Health and Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
University of Tasmania · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe interconnectedness of physical inactivity and sedentarism, obesity, non-communicable disease (NCD) prevalence, and socio-economic costs, are well known. There is also strong research evidence regarding the mutuality between well-being outcomes and the neighbourhood environment. However, much of this evidence relates to urban contexts and there is a paucity of evidence in relation to regional communities. A better understanding of available physical activity (PA) infrastructure, its usage, and community perceptions regarding neighbourhood surroundings, could be very important in determining requirements for health improvement in regional communities. The aims of this research were to 1. Explore and evaluate the public's perception of the PA environment; and 2. Evaluate the quantity, variety, and quality of existing PA infrastructure in regional Northwest (NW) Tasmania.

methodsA mixed methods approach guided data collection, analysis, and presentation. Quality of PA infrastructure was assessed using the Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA) instrument and public perception about PA environment was evaluated using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Environmental (IPAQ-E) module. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive summative methods and a team-based researcher triangulation approach was utilised for qualitative data.

resultsOverall, a wide array of high-quality PA infrastructure (with minimal incivilities such as auditory annoyance, litter, graffiti, dog refuse, and vandalism etc.) was available. Survey respondents rated neighbourhoods positively. The overall quality of PA infrastructure, rated on a scale from 0 to 3, was assessed as high (all rated between 2 to 3) with minimal incivilities (rated between 0 and 1.5). Of note, survey respondents confirmed the availability of numerous free-to-access recreational tracks and natural amenities across the 3 local government areas (LGAs) studied. Importantly, most respondents reported minimal disruption to their routine PA practices due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

conclusionThis exploratory research confirmed the availability of a wide range of high-quality PA infrastructure across all three LGAs and there was an overwhelming public appreciation of this infrastructure. The challenge remains to implement place-based PA interventions that address extant barriers and further increase public awareness and utilisation of high-quality PA infrastructure.

Indexed as

COVID-19ExercisePandemicsAnimalsHumansResidence CharacteristicsSurveys and QuestionnairesTasmaniaEnvironmentInfrastructureObesityPhysical activityRegional

Identifiers

PMID35354448
PMCPMC8967567
OpenAlexW4220931259

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.