ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Consensus in Action: Context-Specific Physical Activity Guidelines for Undergraduate Students at a South African University.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community engagement in health guidelines and other normative products: a methodological review.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Review
- Co-Creating Strategies and Recommendations to Enhance the Physical Activities of Undergraduate Students at a South African University: A Social Ecological Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Voices in Motion: Using I-Poems to Uncover Undergraduate University Students' Psychosocial Journey and Physical Activity Behaviours.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
Abstract
Physical inactivity among undergraduate university students has been considered a public health concern. To address this, researchers have utilized consensus workshop approaches to develop effective physical activity (PA) recommendations. However, the existing research has limitations: it is outdated, not context-specific to young adults, and does not account for psychosocial factors (such as mental health, motivation, and social support) that hinder or promote PA behavior, particularly in South Africa. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to engage with stakeholders to achieve a consensus on a set of context-specific guidelines to enhance the physical activities of undergraduate university students. Utilizing the Social Ecological Model, this study employed two online consensus workshops with 25 purposively selected stakeholders (Round 1 = 8 and Round 2 = 17). Stakeholders were divided into breakout rooms via the Google Meets feature, to discuss and brainstorm the guidelines, expressing their agreement or disagreement with the proposed names and descriptions. The consensus was considered achieved when the majority of stakeholder responses fell into the 'Agree with the guideline' category. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to generate common themes, which were then coded via Atlas Ti. V8. Stakeholders reached a consensus on four categories and 32 guidelines, namely, PA (9 guidelines), mental health (7 guidelines), motivation (9 guidelines), and social support (7 guidelines). Each category, along with its respective set of guidelines, provides insights into the type of information undergraduate students require to enhance their PA participation. Using a consensus workshop facilitated the co-creation of context-specific guidelines to enhance the physical activities of undergraduate university students. This approach proved to be a valuable tool for fostering collaboration between academic staff and students.
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.