Development of national physical activity recommendations in 18 EU member states: a comparison of methodologies and the use of evidence

Abstract

ObjectivesThe aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsThe representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network.Outcome measuresFrom national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development.ResultsEighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations.ConclusionsWhile there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for other countries currently planning the development or update of national PA recommendations.

Cross-country collaboration for physical activity promotion: experiences from the European Union Physical Activity Focal Points Network

“…Data collected in 2018 were also summarized in the form of four thematic factsheets: ‘Promoting PA in the health sector’, 17 ‘Promoting PA in the education sector’, 18 ‘Promoting physical activity in the sports sector’ 19 and ‘Promoting physical activity in the workplace’. 20 The survey data have also been used for scientific publications that analysed overall trends in HEPA promotion in the EU across countries and across time, 21 , 22 compared content and development processes of the national PA recommendations, 23 , 24 and described monitoring of PA promotion in children and adolescents. 25 …”

The frequency and performance trends of European countries in the U18 and U20 rankings for 1500 m and 3000 m between 2009–2020

“…Given that social and economic support is important to the athlete's long-term development process, 20 understanding where the best young athletes come from can provide important information to stakeholders, as well as to planning the development or update of national governments, 21 and information about funding and environmental characteristics that can be modified to support athletes' development. The purposes of this study were 1) to determine the nationality of the best European runners competing in 1500 m and 3000 ​m for U18 and U20 categories between 2009 and 2020, 2) to verify the countries' participation trend over time, and 3) to verify whether the place of competition can be associated with classification in ranking position.…”

Physical Activity for Health and Fitness: Past, Present and Future

“…As it’s a general trend physical activity slows with aging and is reduced in retired, unemployed and less educated people, in the current ongoing pandemic era this scenario has been further negatively impacting the society to suffer from psychosocial, financial and economic loss, contributing to lack of physical activity [ 10 ]. Policies encouraged by WHO, such as Global Action Plan for Physical Activity 2018-2030 [ 11 , 12 ] and The European Physical Activity Strategy 2016-2025 [ 13 ] promised to encourage and makes the society aware on benefits of being physically active.…”