Community wide interventions for increasing physical activity

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multi-strategic community wide interventions for physical activity are increasingly popular but their ability to achieve population level improvements is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of community-wide, multi-strategic interventions upon population levels of physical activity.

Should the IDEFICS outcomes have been expected?

“…In retrospect, these findings from the IDEFICS trial clearly fit into the current state of conflicting, null or weak results for paediatric obesity prevention (16,17), diet (18,19) and PA (20,21) change interventions. In this light, should we be surprised that the IDEFICS trial did not have its intended effects?…”

Should the IDEFICS outcomes have been expected?

“…In retrospect, these findings from the IDEFICS trial clearly fit into the current state of conflicting, null or weak results for paediatric obesity prevention (16,17), diet (18,19) and PA (20,21) change interventions. In this light, should we be surprised that the IDEFICS trial did not have its intended effects?…”

Mixed‐method evaluation of a community‐wide physical activity program in Launceston, Australia

“…In a systematic review, Baker and colleagues found no evidence that community-wide initiatives increase population-based physical activity levels. 4 However, this may be due to a dearth of evidence. Baker and colleagues concluded that this result may be due to serious methodological issues with studies rather than the success or failure of the intervention.…”

“…Baker and colleagues recently reviewed 33 community-wide, multi-strategy interventions for increasing physical activity. 4 The review found some program level effects but no overall increase in population physical activity levels. This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up.…”

“…This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up. 4 Despite all studies demonstrating an intent to comprehensively reach their respective target communities, the absence of process evaluation and reporting by subgroups made the assessment of reach difficult. 4 The authors recommended that in addition to impact evaluation, future studies conduct and publish process evaluations to provide information on reach, potential facilitators and barriers, and give an indication of how successfully an intervention has been implemented.…”

The effect of moving to East Village, the former London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games Athletes' Village, on mode of travel (ENABLE London study, a natural experiment)

“…While there is inconclusive evidence that community-wide interventions to increase physical activity are effective [8], walking is a universal form of physical activity available to most people, and strategies to promote walking could yield important health benefits including reducing the risk of obesity [9] and contributing to tackling climate change [10]. Changing the built environment to promote use of public transport may offer a strategy to increase physical activity levels, through increased walking and cycling [11][12][13], which could potentially impact on health [14][15][16].…”

Should the IDEFICS outcomes have been expected?

“…In retrospect, these findings from the IDEFICS trial clearly fit into the current state of conflicting, null or weak results for paediatric obesity prevention (16,17), diet (18,19) and PA (20,21) change interventions. In this light, should we be surprised that the IDEFICS trial did not have its intended effects?…”

Mixed‐method evaluation of a community‐wide physical activity program in Launceston, Australia

“…In a systematic review, Baker and colleagues found no evidence that community-wide initiatives increase population-based physical activity levels. 4 However, this may be due to a dearth of evidence. Baker and colleagues concluded that this result may be due to serious methodological issues with studies rather than the success or failure of the intervention.…”

“…Baker and colleagues recently reviewed 33 community-wide, multi-strategy interventions for increasing physical activity. 4 The review found some program level effects but no overall increase in population physical activity levels. This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up.…”

“…This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up. 4 Despite all studies demonstrating an intent to comprehensively reach their respective target communities, the absence of process evaluation and reporting by subgroups made the assessment of reach difficult. 4 The authors recommended that in addition to impact evaluation, future studies conduct and publish process evaluations to provide information on reach, potential facilitators and barriers, and give an indication of how successfully an intervention has been implemented.…”

The effect of moving to East Village, the former London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games Athletes' Village, on mode of travel (ENABLE London study, a natural experiment)

“…While there is inconclusive evidence that community-wide interventions to increase physical activity are effective [8], walking is a universal form of physical activity available to most people, and strategies to promote walking could yield important health benefits including reducing the risk of obesity [9] and contributing to tackling climate change [10]. Changing the built environment to promote use of public transport may offer a strategy to increase physical activity levels, through increased walking and cycling [11][12][13], which could potentially impact on health [14][15][16].…”

Should the IDEFICS outcomes have been expected?

“…In retrospect, these findings from the IDEFICS trial clearly fit into the current state of conflicting, null or weak results for paediatric obesity prevention (16,17), diet (18,19) and PA (20,21) change interventions. In this light, should we be surprised that the IDEFICS trial did not have its intended effects?…”

Mixed‐method evaluation of a community‐wide physical activity program in Launceston, Australia

“…In a systematic review, Baker and colleagues found no evidence that community-wide initiatives increase population-based physical activity levels. 4 However, this may be due to a dearth of evidence. Baker and colleagues concluded that this result may be due to serious methodological issues with studies rather than the success or failure of the intervention.…”

“…Baker and colleagues recently reviewed 33 community-wide, multi-strategy interventions for increasing physical activity. 4 The review found some program level effects but no overall increase in population physical activity levels. This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up.…”

“…This was attributed to underresourcing, limitations in the measures used to detect an effect, limited duration of the program and/or lack of long-term follow-up. 4 Despite all studies demonstrating an intent to comprehensively reach their respective target communities, the absence of process evaluation and reporting by subgroups made the assessment of reach difficult. 4 The authors recommended that in addition to impact evaluation, future studies conduct and publish process evaluations to provide information on reach, potential facilitators and barriers, and give an indication of how successfully an intervention has been implemented.…”

The effect of moving to East Village, the former London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games Athletes' Village, on mode of travel (ENABLE London study, a natural experiment)

“…While there is inconclusive evidence that community-wide interventions to increase physical activity are effective [8], walking is a universal form of physical activity available to most people, and strategies to promote walking could yield important health benefits including reducing the risk of obesity [9] and contributing to tackling climate change [10]. Changing the built environment to promote use of public transport may offer a strategy to increase physical activity levels, through increased walking and cycling [11][12][13], which could potentially impact on health [14][15][16].…”