ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Public Perceptions on the Use of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and preliminary validation of the Exercise Fit Tool for adolescents undergoing cancer treatment in Hong Kong.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Removing barriers to physical activity for people with long-term conditions: co-creating patient-centred guidance through a multistakeholder consensus approach.British journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- An International Physical Exercise Screening Questionnaire (IPESQ).International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Effects of home-based Thai-boxing high-intensity interval training on physical fitness and body composition in sedentary young adults: A six-week randomized controlled trial.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Walking Capacity in Parkinson's Disease: Test-Retest Reliability of the 6-min Walk Test on a Non-Linear Circuit.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effect of contralateral limb exercise on peripheral perfusion index in a resting limb.The Indian journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Health-Related Physical Fitness of Romanian University Students: The European Fitness Badge Approach.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Singapore Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire 2021 (SPARQ 2021)-Results of Public Feedback.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-administered pre-participation screening for physical activity (PA) requires an instrument that should be easily used and identify individuals at high risk. The Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q+) has been used for many years. Its ease of use and ability to identify those not fit to undergo PA has not been assessed. This study was to determine the rates of the PAR-Q+ in identifying adults who may not be fit for moderate or intense PA and obtain feedback on the use of this tool. A randomized, cross-sectional study involving a wide spectrum of members of the public was carried out. Participants were asked to provide their bio-characteristics, complete the PARQ+, and provide feedback on the questionnaire. With 1019 participants, about 33.1% of the participants using the PARQ+ would have required further medical evaluation. Except for those patients with respiratory illness, there was no difference in levels of PA in those who answered yes or no to the seven PARQ+ questions. Only 4 of the 7 main PAR-Q+ questions were perceived by the public as easily understood. Difficulties were encountered with 21 of the 45 follow-up questions, especially amongst those with co-morbidities. The wordiness of the questions and the large number of technical terms were also sources of concern. Suggestions were provided by participants on areas where improvements may be made to the wording of the questions. The study suggests that the PAR-Q+ probably over-identified those who require further medical evaluation. In addition, the wordiness of the questions and frequent use of medical jargon made the PARQ+ challenging to understand and use. The suggestions provide opportunities to review areas for possible improvements.
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.