Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35701066›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

We Walk: a person-centred, dyadic behaviour change intervention to promote physical activity through outdoor walking after stroke-an intervention development study.

Jacqui H Morris, Linda A Irvine, Stephan U Dombrowski, Brendan McCormack, Frederike Van Wijck, Maggie Lawrence

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Navigating Long-Term Co-Creative Research With Young Adults Diagnosed With Cancer: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Jacqui H MorrisSchool of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK j.y.morris@dundee.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-9130-686X
Linda A IrvineSchool of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Stephan U DombrowskiKinesiology, University of New Brunswick Fredericton, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9832-2777
Brendan McCormackNursing, Queen Margaret University Edinburgh, Musselburgh, UK.
Frederike Van WijckSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Maggie LawrenceSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop We Walk, a theoretically informed, 12-week person-centred dyadic behaviour change intervention to increase physical activity (PA) in community-dwelling people with stroke (PWS) through outdoor walking.

designThree-phase intervention development study. Phase 1: we reviewed literature on barriers and facilitators to PA after stroke and mapped them to the Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework to define intervention components. The Health Action Process Approach determined intervention structure underpinned by person-centred principles. Phase 2: stakeholder focus groups involving PWS, their companions and health professionals reviewed the draft intervention, and experts in behaviour change were consulted. Phase 3: informed by phases 1 and 2, the intervention and form of delivery were refined, with final review through patient and public involvement.

settingThree Scottish community rehabilitation stroke services.

participantsTwenty-three ambulatory community-dwelling PWS and their companions, thirty-seven health and exercise professionals, seven behaviour change experts.

resultsPhase 1 determined key intervention components: information about benefits of walking; developing motivation and confidence to walk; facilitating dyadic goal setting and making plans together; monitoring walking, overcoming challenges; and maintaining walking behaviour. Phase 2 review by stakeholder focus groups and behaviour change experts endorsed intervention components and structure, emphasising dyadic relational aspects as central to potential success. In phase 3, intervention content and handbooks for PWS and buddies were finalised. Healthcare professionals proposed third-sector delivery as most appropriate for intervention delivery. A detailed delivery manual was developed. Participants preferred facilitated face-to-face and telephone delivery.

conclusionsOur multilens intervention development approach ensured this novel intervention was evidence-informed, person-centred, theoretically coherent provided appropriate social support, and addressed issues of concern to PWS. This study established intervention components and structure and identified operational issues critical to future success. Future research will pilot and refine We Walk and evaluate acceptability, feasibility, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN34488928.

Indexed as

Health PromotionStroke RehabilitationWalkingCommunity Health ServicesHumansIndependent LivingScotlandPUBLIC HEALTHREHABILITATION MEDICINEStroke

Identifiers

PMID35701066
PMCPMC9198706

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.