Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36045368›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2022

Refining index to measure physical activity inequality: which group of the population is the most vulnerable?

Dyah Anantalia Widyastari, Aunyarat Khanawapee, Wanisara Charoenrom, Pairoj Saonuam, Piyawat Katewongsa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Recovery shape of physical activity after COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of sport and health science · 2023
    Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Dyah Anantalia WidyastariInstitute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Salaya, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand.
Aunyarat KhanawapeeThailand Physical Activity Knowledge Development Centre (TPAK), Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Salaya, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand.
Wanisara CharoenromThailand Physical Activity Knowledge Development Centre (TPAK), Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Salaya, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand.
Pairoj SaonuamThai Health Promotion Foundation, Bangkok, Thailand.
Piyawat KatewongsaInstitute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Salaya, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, Thailand. piyawat.kat@mahidol.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe existing body of research mostly discusses inequality in physical activity (PA) based on the difference in the level of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Evidence is lacking on the quantified inequality measures (e.g., how big the inequality is, and the distribution) in order to identify the most vulnerable groups of a population. This study measured PA inequality among Thai adults by using three parameters to construct an inequality index: (1) Proportion of the population with sufficient MVPA; (2) Cumulative minutes of MVPA; and (3) The Gini coefficient.

methodsThis study employed three rounds of data from Thailand's Surveillance on Physical Activity (SPA) 2019-2021. In each round, over 6,000 individuals age 18-64 years were selected as nationally-representative samples, and were included in the analysis. PA inequality was constructed by using three parameters, with a combination of the three as the final measure, to identify the sub-groups of the Thai adults who are most vulnerable: groups with the least MVPA, highest insufficiency, and highest inequality index (Gini).

resultsCovid-19 containment measures have widened the gap in PA inequality, as shown by a declining proportion of the population meeting the recommended guidelines, from 74.3% in 2019 to 56.7% in 2020 and 65.5% in 2021. PA inequality existed in all sub-populations. However, by combining three parameters, the most vulnerable groups during the Covid-19 epidemic were identified as follows: (1) Those with no income; (2) The unemployed; (3) Those who have no access to PA facilities; (4) Older adults aged 60 + years; and (5) Those earning < 3,500 baht per month. Further, residents of Bangkok, young adults aged 18-24, individuals who attained primary level education or less, those who had no exposure to a PA awareness campaign and those who have a debilitating chronic disease also had elevated risk of PA insufficiency.

conclusionA concerning level of PA inequality existed in all sub-populations. The use of combined indicators in measuring PA inequality should aid in determining the most vulnerable groups of the population with a refined procedure. This method can be applied in many settings since the baseline data used to measure inequality (i.e., percent sufficient and cumulative minutes of MVPA) are widely available.

Indexed as

COVID-19AgedExerciseHumansThailandYoung AdultCovid-19 epidemicMVPAPA inequalityVulnerable population

Identifiers

PMID36045368
PMCPMC9428882

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.