Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36685059›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2022

Building partnerships: A case study of physical activity researchers and practitioners collaborating to build evidence to inform the delivery of a workplace step count challenge.

Ailsa Niven, James A Ainge, Mary Allison, Trish Gorely, Paul Kelly, Gozde Ozakinci, Gemma C Ryde, Simone A Tomaz, Samuel Warne, Victoria Whiteford and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 52% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Ailsa NivenPhysical Activity for Health Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
James A AingeSchool of Psychology & Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, United Kingdom.
Mary AllisonPhysical Activity for Health Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Trish GorelyDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, University of the Highlands and Islands, Inverness, United Kingdom.
Paul KellyPhysical Activity for Health Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Gozde OzakinciDivision of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.
Gemma C RydeBHF Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Kings College, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Simone A TomazFaculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom.
Samuel WarnePopulation and Behavioural Science Division, School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, United Kingdom.
Victoria WhitefordSchool of Kinesiology, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Carl GreenwoodPaths for All, Stirling, United Kingdom.
University of Edinburgh · GBUniversity of St Andrews · GBUniversity of Stirling · GBUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of the Highlands and Islands · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Walking is an integral part of Scotland's National Physical Activity Strategy, and the charity Paths for All's Workplace Step Count Challenge is a flagship programme within this strategy to promote physical activity. Effectively promoting physical activity requires collaborative engagement between stakeholders. However, there is limited guidance on how to do this. The aim of this case study is to share an example of a partnership between Paths for All and researchers to inform the development and delivery of the Workplace Step Count Challenge. Method: An overview of the partnership, example activities, reflections on opportunities and challenges, and suggestions for future partnership working are considered. Results: The partnership has evolved and strengthened over time through building trust. Many of the research activities provide an evidence base for the intervention. This work is mutually beneficial providing support for the work of the organisation, and opportunities for researchers to undertake "real world" research, leading to formal outputs and funding. The "real world" nature is challenging to integrate the most robust research designs. Recommendations for developing future partnerships were identified. Conclusion: Promoting physical activity effectively requires partnership working, and this paper provides insight into how such partnerships can work to inform future collaborations.

Indexed as

collaborationevaluationinterventionScotlandworksite

Identifiers

PMID36685059
PMCPMC9845875
OpenAlexW4313477652

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.