SynthesisFamily practice2023
Recruitment and characteristics of participants in trials of physical activity for adults aged 45 years and above in general practice: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Family practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How can physical activity promotion be optimised in general practice: a narrative review of the literature.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneral practice is well situated to promote physical activity (PA), but with PA levels declining after 45 years of age, often those who are most likely to benefit from interventions tend to be the least likely recruited to participate in research. AIMS AND RATIONALE: The aim of this study was to investigate recruitment and reporting of participant demographics in PA trials for adults aged 45 years and above. Specific objectives were: (i) to examine the reporting of demographics of participants; (ii) to investigate the strategies used to recruit these participants; and, (iii) to examine the efficiency of recruitment strategies.
methodsSeven databases were searched, including: PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Only randomized control trials involving adults 45 years old or older recruited through primary care were included. The PRISMA framework for systematic review was followed, which involved 2 researchers independently conducting title, abstract, and full article screening. Tools for data extraction and synthesis were adapted from previous work on inclusivity in recruitment.
resultsThe searches retrieved 3,491 studies of which 12 were included for review. Sample size of the studies ranged from 31 to 1,366, with a total of 6,042 participants of which 57% were female. Of 101 participating practices, 1 was reported as rural. Reporting of recruitment lacked detail-only 6 studies outlined how practices were recruited. 11/12 studies involved a database or chart review to identify participants that met the inclusion criteria, followed by a letter of invitation sent to those people. The studies with higher recruitment efficiency ratios each employed more than 1 recruitment strategy, e.g. opportunistic invitations and telephone calls.
conclusionThis systematic review has presented deficits in the reporting of both demographics and recruitment. Future research should aim for a standardized approach to reporting.
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.