ArticleEuropean journal of public health2022
Development of the health promoting sports club-national audit tool.
Article in European journal of public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Local governance of sport: a national survey on how public opinion evaluates municipal sports development and priorities.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- The health promoting sports coach: theoretical background and practical guidance.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Implementation of the GAA 'healthy clubs project' in Ireland: a qualitative study using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- Using a socioecological approach to explore healthy lifestyle in elite sport: a qualitative study of French athletes', coaches', and managers' perspectives.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSports clubs have requested support from national governing authorities to invest in health promotion (HP), by developing policies, guidelines and dedicated funding. This article outlines the development of a national audit tool to review policies development and implementation to support HP in sports clubs.
methodsA five-step process was undertaken by an international project team: (i) a rapid literature review to identify items assessing policies in physical activity, HP and sports, (ii) a thematic analysis to categorize items, (iii) a Delphi method to analyze item relevance, country specificity, reformulation, validation and organization, (iv) face validity through an online survey and in-depth interviews with expert representatives on physical activity and sports and (v) audit tool finalization though project team consensus.
resultsEight sources were reviewed with 269 items identified. Items were coded into 25 categories with 3 broad themes: policies, actors and settings-based approach. The Delphi study extracted and refined 50 items and categorized them into 10 sections. After revisions from 22 surveys and 8 interviews, consensus was reached by the international project team on 41 items categorized into 11 sections: Role of ministry or department; Policies; Communication; Implementation and Dissemination; Evaluation and Measurement methods; Sub-national-level policies; Funding and Coordination; Participative approach; Actors and Stakeholders; National sporting events; Case studies and Implicated stakeholders.
conclusionTo progress HP in the sports club context it is necessary to understand existing national-level policies. This national audit tool will aid in monitoring and assessing national policies for health promoting sports clubs.
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.