Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40033332›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Strategies and barriers to implementing physically active teaching in universities from the perspective of lecturers: a qualitative study.

Robert Rupp, Birgit Wallmann-Sperlich, Jens Bucksch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Robert RuppDepartment of Prevention and Health Promotion, Heidelberg University of Education, Keplerstraße 87, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany. rupp@ph-heidelberg.de.
Birgit Wallmann-SperlichInstitute of Sport Science, University of Würzburg, Judenbühlweg 11, Würzburg, 97082, Germany.
Jens BuckschDepartment of Prevention and Health Promotion, Heidelberg University of Education, Keplerstraße 87, Heidelberg, 69120, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUniversity students accumulate lots of sedentary time without interrupting and comprehensive approaches to reduce time spent sedentary are lacking. The implementation of physically active university teaching needs practicable approaches and the support by lecturers. However, there is little research on which physically activating strategies lecturers actually use and what barriers they become aware to implement these. This exploratory, qualitative study aims to identify physically activating strategies as well as barriers for reducing sitting time and physically active university teaching from the perspective of lecturers.

methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 lecturers to explore potential physically activating strategies in university teaching, assess their degree of utilization, and identify barriers to implementation. The data were analysed by a structured content analysis of the interview transcripts using MAXQDA 2020 software.

resultsPhysically activating strategies are hardly known among university lecturers and are seldomly used on a regular and conscious basis. We identified two types of strategies with physically activating measures and teaching methods. Lecturers highlighted two specific types of physically activating measures: physical activity breaks and the use of physically activating furniture. All together, we identified 18 distinct teaching methods (e.g. group work, gallery walk) that integrate learning processes with physical activity in a pedagogical-didactic manner. The main barriers to implementation identified were lack of space, lack of time, students' unwillingness to move; organizational social norms, and lecturers' uncertainty about how to implement these strategies effectively.

conclusionsUniversity lecturers are generally unfamiliar with and rarely use physically activating strategies to reduce sedentary behavior in students. However, lecturers identified 18 potential teaching methods that integrate physical activity with pedagogical-didactic principles, offering a new approach to physically active university teaching. These methods present an untapped potential for the low-threshold integration of physical activity and breaks from sitting into university teaching, aligning with "stealth health" strategies that incidentally promote health while assuring a "high-quality education" as the core concern of higher education teaching. Understanding and addressing the barriers to implementation, such as lack of space, time, social and organizational norms, is crucial for the effective planning and implementation of interventions.

Indexed as

Educational PersonnelExerciseFacultyTeachingAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative ResearchSedentary BehaviorStudentsUniversitiesActive learningHigher educationPedagogyPhysically active learning (PAL)Sedentary behaviorSittingStealth interventionTeaching methodsUniversity studentsUniversity teaching

Identifiers

PMID40033332
PMCPMC11877959

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.