ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2025
Culturally appropriate physical activity promotion strategy package among older Chinese adults in the UK: a feasibility randomised control trial protocol.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOlder Chinese adults in the UK are more likely to be physically inactive and face unique cultural and socioeconomic barriers to physical activity (PA) compared with the general population, yet they lack tailored interventions. Using findings from an evidence review and qualitative interviews, and guided by the Behaviour Change Wheel framework, we developed a culturally appropriate PA promotion package to enhance the capability, opportunity, and motivation of older Chinese adults in the UK to engage in PA.
aimThis study aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of culturally appropriate PA promotion strategies among older Chinese adults in the UK. METHODS/
designThis is a two-arm pragmatic feasibility RCT. Community-dwelling individuals who self-identify as Chinese, reside in the UK, are aged 60 years and older, and do not meet the World Health Organization (WHO) PA recommendations (i.e. < 150 min moderate PA or balance/strength exercise < 2 times per week) will be recruited. Participants will be randomised to receive either the culturally appropriate PA promotion strategy package or the WHO PA recommendation leaflet. Outcome data will be collected at baseline, 12 weeks, and 18 weeks post-randomisation. Primary outcomes will include feasibility measures (e.g. recruitment, compliance, adherence, and follow-up rates), intervention acceptability (qualitative interviews), and both subjective PA levels (PA Scale for the Elderly) and objective PA levels (Realalt 3DTriSport 3D Pedometer). Secondary outcomes will include the Brief COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) questionnaire, physical function assessments (Short Physical Performance Battery, SPPB), and quality of life (Control, Autonomy, Self-realisation, and Pleasure-12,CASP-12). The feasibility of the study will be evaluated based on the pre-specified progression criteria. DISCUSSION: This is the first study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of conducting an RCT of a culturally appropriate PA promotion strategy package among older Chinese adults in the UK. The findings from this study will inform improvements in PA promotion strategies and guide the development of a full-scale RCT, with the ultimate goal of creating culturally appropriate, sustainable interventions to improve the health and well-being of older Chinese adults in the UK.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework on 19 November 2024 ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XQHJS ).
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.