ArticleBMC public health2025
Adaptations to the welsh national exercise referral scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study exploring the experiences of service users and providers and supplementary out-of-pocket cost analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite the proliferation of exercise referral schemes in the UK, evidence on their efficacy is equivocal. The Welsh National Exercise Referral Scheme (NERS) is heavily used but inequalities in uptake have been reported. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, NERS was initially suspended and then transitioned from standard face-to-face delivery to alternative remote methods, including virtual delivery. The aim of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to uptake and engagement of NERS when delivered in face-to-face and virtual formats, and to examine the cost to service users of engaging with the scheme in these different ways.
methodsThis was a qualitative study with supplementary cost analysis. Maximum variation sampling was used to recruit participants. Interviews with service users (n = 21) and one person who declined the service, and three focus groups with service providers (n = 19), were conducted. Framework analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data. Quantitative data obtained through the interviews on service users' out-of-pocket costs of attending face-to-face or virtual classes were summarised using descriptive statistics.
resultsFive themes were identified from the qualitative analysis which summarised barriers and facilitators to uptake and engagement as perceived and experienced by the different stakeholders. Themes included: opaqueness and uncertainty around referral; Exercise Referral Professionals allaying concerns and providing reassurance at scheme entry; the mixed appeal and accessibility of virtual delivery; factors that support ongoing engagement; and personal and financial circumstances restricting uptake and engagement.
conclusionsThis study indicates that offering a virtual version of NERS could make the scheme more accessible to those who are typically underserved, provided strategies to address digital inclusion are addressed. Findings provide wider evidence to inform adaptations that could be made to ensure that other exercise referral schemes can optimise virtual delivery.
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.