Cited by 115Physical Activity and HealthTreatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Patients' views of physical activity as treatment for depression: a qualitative study

Open access
Searle, Aidan, Calnan, Michael, Lewis, Glyn, Campbell, John, Taylor, Adrian, Turner, Katrina·2011·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidance recommends physical activity to manage patients with persistent subthreshold depressive symptoms or mild-to-moderate depression. However, little is known regarding the acceptability of physical activity as a treatment for depression from patients' perspective. AIM: To explore patients' views of physical activity for the treatment of depression in the context of primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: In-depth interviews were held with 33 participants taking part in a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of physical activity for the management of depression. SETTING: Primary care. RESULTS: Most participants perceived physical activity to be an acceptable treatment for depression. The mechanisms by which physical activity could enhance mood were attributed to a number of subjective benefits including biochemical pathways, providing a source of distraction from negative thoughts, and a sense of purpose. Participants who expressed a belief that their depression was caused by biochemical mechanisms reported activity that 'raised the heartbeat' as most beneficial, while those who believed depression was situational in origin tended to state the benefits of less-aerobic activities, such as walking. Many participants reported low motivation and a lack of confidence as barriers to undertaking physical activity. These patients suggested that medication could be helpful for initiating and maintaining activity. CONCLUSION: Patients view physical activity as an effective treatment for depression. However, they vary in their views about how physical activity might impact on depression, what intensity and form of activity is necessary to enhance mood, and the barriers to undertaking activity. This variation suggests the need for GPs to elicit patients' views on physical activity as a treatment, and offer interventions that are tailored to the needs and expectations of individual patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3399/bjgp11x567054

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • GP-prescribed exercise is acceptable to patients with mild to moderate depression.

    “recent evidence points to the acceptability of GP-prescribed exercise by patients with mild to moderate depression (Searle et al. 2011).”

    From A call to action: Exercise as treatment for patients with mental illness (2015) · cites this paper as Searle et al. 2011

    The Clinical implications section says patients and GPs view physical activity as an acceptable treatment option, citing Searle et al. (2011). The Introduction discusses physical activity in guidelines for mild to moderate depression, but the acceptability statement does not establish that finding specifically for patients with mild to moderate depression or for GP-prescribed exercise. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Patients find exercise acceptable.

    “This is despite patient acceptability for exercise.”

    From A call to action: Exercise as treatment for patients with mental illness (2015) · cites this paper as Searle et al. 2011

    The supplied passages and additional indexed passages are labeled as a different paper, “Participants’ experiences of facilitated physical activity for the management of depression in primary care.” Its Clinical implications section says patients view physical activity as an acceptable treatment and cites Searle et al. (2011), but it is not the cited Searle paper itself. The available copy therefore does not allow verification of what the cited paper says. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Frederick-Recascino CM (2002) Self-determination theory and participation motivation research in the sport and exercise domain. In Deci EL and Ryan MR (eds) Handbook of Self-Determination Research. New York: University of Rochester Press, pp. 277-296.
  2. Pidgeon N and Henwood K (1998) Using grounded theory in psychological research. In: Hayes N (ed.) Doing Qualitative Analysis in Psychology. Hove: Psychology Press, pp. 245-274.
  3. Prior L, Wood F, Lewis G, et al. (2003) Stigma revis- ited, disclosure of emotional problems in primary care. Social Science & Medicine 56(10): 2191- 2200. Available at: http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/ prescriptions
  4. Ritchie J and Lewis J (2003) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Scientists and Researchers. London: SAGE.
  5. Searle A, Calnan M, Lewis G, et al. (2011) Patients' views of physical activity for the treatment of depression in primary care: A qualitative study. British Journal of General Practice. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11x567054.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Searle, A., Calnan, M., Lewis, G., Campbell, J., Taylor, A., & Turner, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Kent (GB)
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2011-04-01
Volume
61
Issue
585
Pages
e149-e156
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2099055399
Cited by
115
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion)
  • PEARL (University of Plymouth) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (03/45/07)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
physical activity, depression, patient acceptability, primary care, barriers to exercise, walking, exercise motivation, mood improvement, antidepressants, personalized interventions
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Depressive Disorder, Exercise Therapy, Humans, Middle Aged, Patient Satisfaction, Young Adult

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