Health enhancing physical activity in all policies? Comparison of national public actors between France and Belgium

Hoye, Aurélie Van; Vandoorne, Chantal; Absil, Gaëtan; Lecomte, Flore; Fallon, Cathérine; Vuillemin, Anne

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.01.008

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This all suggests a defined policy to tackle PIA, while showing a genuine interest in tacking PIA at a policy level within those years [27]. Nevertheless, some issues in leadership and coordination at the national and sub-national level (i.e., the administrative structure of the country), and lack of cross-sectional coordination regarding “health-enhancing physical activity” were reported, highlighting scope for improvement when tackling PIA [28]. For men [6], Luxembourg showed reductions in the 2013–2017 period, but no changes in the period between 2002 and 2005.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The active living gender’s gap challenge: 2013–2017 Eurobarometers physical inactivity data show constant higher prevalence in women with no progress towards global reduction goals

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) considers physical inactivity (PIA) as a critical noncommunicable factor for disease and mortality, affecting more women than men. In 2013, the WHO set a 10% reduction of the PIA prevalence, with the goal to be reached by 2025. Changes in the 2013–2017 period of physical inactivity prevalence in the 28 European Union (EU) countries were evaluated to track the progress in achieving WHO 2025 target.MethodsIn 2013 and 2017 EU Special Eurobarometers, the physical activity levels reported by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire of 53,607 adults were analyzed. Data were considered as a whole sample and country-by-country. A χ2 test was used to analyze the physical inactivity prevalence (%) between countries, analyzing women and men together and separately. Additionally, PIA prevalence was analyzed between years (2013–2017) for the overall EU sample and within-country using a Z-Score for two population proportions.ResultsThe PIA prevalence increased between 2013 and 2017 for the overall EU sample (p < 0.001), and for women (p = 0.04) and men (p < 0.001) separately. Data showed a higher PIA prevalence in women versus men during both years (p < 0.001). When separately considering changes in PIA by gender, only Belgium’s women and Luxembourg’s men showed a reduction in PIA prevalence. Increases in PIA prevalence over time were observed in women from Austria, Croatia, Germany, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Romania, and Slovakia and in men from Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Spain.ConclusionsPIA prevalence showed an overall increase across the EU and for both women and men between 2013 and 2017, with higher rates of PIA reported for women versus men during both years. PIA prevalence was reduced in only Belgium’s women and Luxembourg’s men. Our data indicate a limited gender-sensible approach while tacking PIA prevalence with no progress reaching global voluntary reductions of PIA for 2025.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The active living gender’s gap challenge: 2013–2017 Eurobarometers physical inactivity data show constant higher prevalence in women with no progress towards global reduction goals

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the HEPA PAT v2 contains some questions concerning the local level (Bull et al, 2014;WHO, 2015), CAPLA-Santé includes some questions related to the national level. The use of the HEPA-PAT allowed researchers to discover that local level government is important when implementing national policy (Bull et al, 2015;Prévot-Ledrich et al, 2016;Van Hoye et al, 2019;WHO, 2014). Although some local governments can develop HEPA policies without the support of national policies, the use of CAPLA-Santé could assess how national policy influences the development of HEPA policies at local levels.…”

Section: > Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Local Health-Enhancing Physical Activity Policy Analysis Tool in France: CAPLA-Santé

Racine

Hoye

Baron

et al. 2020

Health Promotion Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The promotion of health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) has become a key objective in public health policy. Therefore, based on the national HEPA Policy Audit Tool Version 2 (HEPA PAT v2) of the World Health Organization, a tool was designed to support local governments in assessing HEPA policies. This study aims to describe the adaptation and testing of the HEPA policy analysis tool (CAPLA-Santé) at the local level in France. The work was conducted in three stages: (1) an intersectoral group of experts was constituted, and the group adapted each item of the HEPA PAT v2 tool to the local level; (2) a testing phase with seven local governments helped to collect data and feedback on the tool; and (3) a final workshop was organized to adjust and finalize the tool. The final version of CAPLA-Santé contains 21 items divided into six major sections: overview of HEPA stakeholders in the local government area, policy documents, policy contents, funding and political engagement, studies and measures relating to physical activity in the local government area, and progress achieved and future challenges. CAPLA-Santé allows the collection and in-depth analysis of local level policies to assess the progress in promoting HEPA and intersectoral collaboration as well as identifying successful policy levers and remaining challenges.

show abstract

“…This has led to various interventions targeting physical activity behaviour that are delivered to different populations and across many settings by a range of public, private and voluntary providers, many of which are multi-sectoral and multi-component. The complexity and heterogeneity in interventions poses challenges to understanding their effectiveness, and to generalising from one intervention to another [ 4 , 5 ]. Given the high rates of inactivity [ 6 , 7 ] and the importance of physical activity for health [ 8 ], it is vital that we learn from the interventions delivered about what works, for whom, and in what contexts [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions

Fynn

Hardeman

Milton

et al. 2020

Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Evaluation of physical activity interventions is vital to inform, and justify, evidence-based policy and practice to support population-wide changes in physical activity. Several evaluation frameworks and guidance documents have been developed to facilitate the evaluation and reporting of evaluation studies in public health. However, there is a lack of evidence about whether frameworks are being used to guide evaluation. There continues to be claims of poor and inconsistent reporting in evaluation studies. The aim of this review was to assess the use of evaluation frameworks and the quality of reporting of how they were applied within evaluation studies of physical activity interventions. Objectives To identify whether evaluation frameworks are reported to have been used within evaluation studies of physical activity interventions, and which frameworks have been used. To appraise the quality of reporting with regards to how evaluation frameworks have been used. Method We developed a checklist of indicators to enable a critical appraisal of the use and reporting of different evaluation frameworks in evaluation studies. We conducted a systematic search and review of evaluation studies published between 2015 and the date of the search to appraise the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks. A narrative synthesis is provided. Results The review identified 292 evaluation studies of physical activity interventions, only 69 (23%) of these mentioned using an evaluation framework, and only 16 different frameworks were referred to. There was variation in the quality of reporting of framework use. 51 (74%) studies were identified as being explicitly based on the stated framework, however only 26 (38%) provided detailed descriptions consistently across all the checklist indicators. Details of adaptations and limitations in how frameworks were applied were less frequently reported. The review also highlighted variability in the reporting of intervention components. More consistent and precise reporting of framework and intervention components is needed. Conclusion Evaluation frameworks can facilitate a more systematic evaluation report and we argue their limited use suggests missed opportunities to apply frameworks to guide evaluation and reporting in evaluation studies. Variability in the quality of reporting of framework use limits the comparability and transferability of evidence. Where a framework has been used, the checklist of indicators can be employed to facilitate the reporting of an evaluation study and to review the quality of an evaluation report.

show abstract

Health enhancing physical activity in all policies? Comparison of national public actors between France and Belgium

Cited by 15 publications

References 15 publications

The active living gender’s gap challenge: 2013–2017 Eurobarometers physical inactivity data show constant higher prevalence in women with no progress towards global reduction goals

The active living gender’s gap challenge: 2013–2017 Eurobarometers physical inactivity data show constant higher prevalence in women with no progress towards global reduction goals

Development of a Local Health-Enhancing Physical Activity Policy Analysis Tool in France: CAPLA-Santé

A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About