Cited by 137Physical Activity and HealthUrban Transport and AccessibilityBehavioral Health and Interventions

Community-based efforts to promote physical activity: A systematic review of interventions considering mode of delivery, study quality and population subgroups

Bock, Christina, Jarczok, Marc N., Litaker, David·2014·Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

Abstract

Objectives Despite the known benefits of physical activity, the majority of adults in developed countries lead sedentary lifestyles. The community setting is a promising venue for physical activity-promoting interventions. Our objectives were to investigate the effectiveness of community-based physical activity interventions by mode of delivery, study quality and to analyse intervention effectiveness in different subgroups in the population. Design We conducted a systematic literature review in Medline and other databases to identify controlled, community-based physical activity interventions published between 2001 and 2012. Methods We performed several post hoc subgroup comparisons for mode of delivery, study quality and selected population characteristics, using net per cent change in physical activity outcomes between baseline and follow-up as an effect measure. Results We identified 55 studies on exercise/walking sessions, face-to-face counselling, public campaigns and interventions by mail, the Internet and telephone presenting data on 20,532 participants. Overall, half of the studies reported positive physical activity outcomes (total net per cent change: 16.4%; p=0.159; net per cent change for high-quality studies, i.e. studies meeting more than 5 out of 7 quality criteria: 16.2%; p=0.010). Interventions using face-to-face counselling or group sessions were most effective (net per cent change: 35.0%; p=0.014). Net per cent change was also higher in studies exclusively tailored to women (27.7%; p=0.005) or specific ethnic groups (38.9%; p=0.034). Conclusions This systematic review supports the effectiveness of community-based physical activity interventions in high-quality studies. Our results suggest that interventions using personal contact as well as tailored interventions are most promising.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsams.2013.04.009

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bock, C., Jarczok, M. N., & Litaker, D.
Affiliations
Heidelberg University (DE)
Corresponding author
Bock, Christina
Venue
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-05
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
276-282
ISSN
1440-2440 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2131305741
Cited by
137
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5
FWCI
0.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of science and medicine in sport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Urban Transport and Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
physical activity interventions, community-based intervention, sedentary lifestyle, mode of delivery, face-to-face counseling, public health campaigns, personalized interventions, intervention effectiveness, study quality, subpopulations, ethnic groups, women
MeSH terms
Adult, Community Participation, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Research Design, Residence Characteristics, Exercise

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review