ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2022
A Study on the Establishment of Physical Activity Environment for People with Disabilities in South Korea.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sports Facility Use and Perceptions of Exercise Effectiveness: A Nationwide Survey of People with Disabilities in South Korea.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Sports and Special Populations: Training Physiology in Health and Sports Performance.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to analyze the relative importance and priority of what factors should be reflected in the administration to efficiently consider the needs of people with disabilities for the physical activity (PA) environment in South Korea. To achieve the purpose of the study, 32 experts (e.g., faculty members, administrators) with more than 5 years of experience with PA for people with disabilities were asked to prioritize the factors that should be reflected in the PA environment. The questionnaire consisted of 4 factors in the upper-layer (H2), 8 factors in the middle-layer (H3), and 38 items in the low-layer (H4). The research instrument was composed of a pairwise comparison of decision elements to analyze the priority. For the analysis of the questionnaire data, the relative importance and priority were analyzed using Expert Choice 2000, a solution dedicated to priority analysis. The results are as follows. The relative importance of H2 was determined by programs, instructors, facilities, and information. In the relative importance among H3, the program type was determined as the highest factor in the program, and instructor expertise was determined as the highest factor in the instructor. The type of facility was determined as the highest factor in the facility, and the information provider was determined as the highest factor in the information. As a result of analyzing the priority of H4, it was found that the program within the sports facilities had the highest priority.
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.