How does network structure affect partnerships for promoting physical activity? Evidence from Brazil and Colombia.

The objective of this study was to describe the network structure and factors associated with collaboration in two networks that promote physical activity (PA) in Brazil and Colombia. Organizations that focus on studying and promoting PA in Brazil (35) and Colombia (53) were identified using a modified one-step reputational snowball sampling process. Participants completed an on-line survey between December 2008 and March 2009 for the Brazil network, and between April and June 2009 for the Colombia network. Network stochastic modeling was used to investigate the likelihood of reported inter-organizational collaboration. While structural features of networks were significant predictors of collaboration within each network, the coefficients and other network characteristics differed. Brazil's PA network was decentralized with a larger number of shared partnerships. Colombia's PA network was centralized and collaboration was influenced by perceived importance of peer organizations. On average, organizations in the PA network of Colombia reported facing more barriers (1.5 vs. 2.5 barriers) for collaboration. Future studies should focus on how these different network structures affect the implementation and uptake of evidence-based PA interventions.

Assembling the puzzle for promoting physical activity in Brazil: a social network analysis.

BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is a significant public health problem in Brazil that may be addressed by partnerships and networks. In conjunction with Project GUIA (Guide for Useful Interventions for Physical Activity in Brazil and Latin America), the aim of this study was to conduct a social network analysis of physical activity in Brazil. METHODS: An online survey was completed by 28 of 35 organizations contacted from December 2008 through March 2009. Network analytic methods examined measures of collaboration, importance, leadership, and attributes of the respondent and organization. RESULTS: Leadership nominations for organizations studied ranged from 0 to 23. Positive predictors of collaboration included: south region, GUIA membership, years working in physical activity, and research, education, and promotion/practice areas of physical activity. The most frequently reported barrier to collaboration was bureaucracy. CONCLUSION: Social network analysis identified factors that are likely to improve collaboration among organizations in Brazil.