ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Barriers in motion: a multi-methods approach to exploring physical activity, physical function, and program challenges in adult day services.
Article in Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Physical activity (PA) helps older adults age in place and retain independence. Adult Day Centers (ADCs) are critical community-based spaces that provide PA programming, yet the dosage and impact of PA in these settings remains empirically unassessed. Methods: This study used a multi-methods cross-sectional design to assess PA and physical function among ADC participants, as well as directors' perspectives on PA programming. PA was assessed via an ActivPAL inclinometer, and physical function was assessed via the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ADC directors. Data from interviews was coded openly and axially, and analyzed inductively and deductively to extract major themes. The qualitative analysis was subsequently guided by the Frequency, Intensity, Type, and Time principles to assess PA dosage. Results: On average, ADC participants ( Discussion: Findings reflect broader systemic challenges that influence PA programming at ADCs. The directors cited barriers such as staffing limitations, funding constraints, and safety concerns, emphasizing the need for and desire to receive additional support. These challenges were also reflected in the ADC participants' PA and physical function. It is imperative to support ADCs in delivering evidence-based programming as they can be key to retaining physical functional status and improving the quality of life of ADC participants. Future studies should consider community-based strategies involving liaisons and PA experts to support ADC staff, increase PA training, and reduce staff burden and turnover.
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.