ArticleOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2022
Feasibility of 'parkrun' for people with knee osteoarthritis: A mixed methods pilot study.
Article in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2022. 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.
- Pre-exercise and acute movement-evoked pain trajectories during a 24-week outdoor walking program for knee osteoarthritis (WALK).Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the feasibility of 'parkrun' for people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and examine its potential to improve symptoms and increase physical activity. Design: This uncontrolled mixed methods pilot study enrolled people with knee OA not meeting physical activity guidelines. Participants were asked to walk in four consecutive parkrun events supervised by an exercise physiologist/physiotherapist. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment data (numbers screened and time to enrol 15 participants), adherence to the protocol, acceptability (measured by confidence, enjoyment, difficulty ratings and qualitative interviews), and safety (adverse events). Secondary measures were changes in knee pain, function, stiffness, and physical activity levels. Results: Participants (n = 17) were enrolled over 11 months and recruitment was slower than anticipated. Fourteen participants attended all four parkruns and three of these participants shortened the 5 km course to ∼3 km. Across all four parkruns, 75% of participants reported high confidence that they could complete the upcoming parkrun and the majority (87%) enjoyed participating. Most participants rated parkrun either "slightly difficult" (38.5%) or "moderately difficult" (35%) and two mild adverse events were reported. Participants showed improvements in knee pain, function, stiffness, and physical activity levels. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrates parkrun's feasibility, acceptability, safety and, its potential to improve knee OA symptoms and physical activity levels. Participating in parkrun was acceptable and enjoyable for some, but not all participants. The scalability, accessibility and wide appeal of parkrun supports the development of larger programs of research to evaluate the use of parkrun for people with knee OA.
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.