A narrative review of global and national physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines development processes - The GUidelines Standards (GUS) project.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and public health guidelines serve to direct clinical practice and policy, based on the best available evidence. The World Health Organization (WHO) and national health bodies of many countries have released physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines. Despite significant overlap in the body of evidence reviewed, the guidelines differ across jurisdictions. This study aimed to review the processes used to develop global and national physical activity and sedentary behaviour guidelines and examine the extent to which they conform with a recommended methodological standard for the development of guidelines. METHODS: We extracted data on nine sets of guidelines from seven jurisdictions (WHO, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States). We rated each set of guidelines as high, medium, or low quality on criteria related to the rigour of the development process. RESULTS: We observed variation in the quality of guidelines development processes across jurisdictions and across different criteria. Guidelines received the strongest overall ratings for criteria on clearly describing the evidence selected and stating an explicit link between the recommendations and the supporting evidence. Guidelines received the weakest overall ratings for criteria related to clearly describing the methods used to formulate the recommendations and reporting external review by experts prior to publication. Evaluated against the selected criteria, the strongest processes were undertaken by the WHO and Canada. CONCLUSIONS: Reaching agreement on acceptable guideline development processes, as well as the inclusion and appraisal procedures of different types of evidence, would help to strengthen and align future guidelines.

Prioritizing a research agenda on built environments and physical activity: a twin panel Delphi consensus process with researchers and knowledge users.

BACKGROUND: The growth of urban dwelling populations globally has led to rapid increases of research and policy initiatives addressing associations between the built environment and physical activity (PA). Given this rapid proliferation, it is important to identify priority areas and research questions for moving the field forward. The objective of this study was to identify and compare research priorities on the built environment and PA among researchers and knowledge users (e.g., policy makers, practitioners). METHODS: Between September 2022 and April 2023, a three-round, modified Delphi survey was conducted among two independent panels of international researchers (n = 38) and knowledge users (n = 23) to identify similarities and differences in perceived research priorities on the built environment and PA and generate twin 'top 10' lists of the most important research needs. RESULTS: From a broad range of self-identified issues, both panels ranked in common the most pressing research priorities including stronger study designs such as natural experiments, research that examines inequalities and inequities, establishing the cost effectiveness of interventions, safety and injuries related to engagement in active transportation (AT), and considerations for climate change and climate adaptation. Additional priorities identified by researchers included: implementation science, research that incorporates Indigenous perspectives, land-use policies, built environments that support active aging, and participatory research. Additional priorities identified by knowledge users included: built environments and PA among people living with disabilities and a need for national data on trip chaining, multi-modal travel, and non-work or school-related AT. CONCLUSIONS: Five common research priorities between the two groups emerged, including (1) to better understand causality, (2) interactions with the natural environment, (3) economic evaluations, (4) social disparities, and (5) preventable AT-related injuries. The findings may help set directions for future research, interdisciplinary and intersectoral collaborations, and funding opportunities.

The cross-sectional associations of chronic conditions and disability with self-reported physical activity among adults in England.

OBJECTIVE: Using cross-sectional data from the 2018 Health Survey for England, this study describes the types of impairment reported by people with chronic conditions and the association of chronic conditions and impairments with physical activity(PA). METHODS: Participants self-reported the presence of seven chronic health conditions (diabetes; stroke/ischemic heart disease; hypertension; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); asthma; arthritis/rheumatism/fibrositis; back problems), 11 types of impairment (vision, hearing, mobility, dexterity; learning; memory; mental health; stamina; social or behavioural; other; none); and their PA using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate the association of a)impairment type, b)number of impairments, and c)impairment type and chronic condition (mutually adjusted) with PA. RESULTS: In total, 2243 adults (55% female, 44% age > 55 yrs) reported having a chronic condition. PA volume (MET minutes per week: median (IQR)) was highest in participants with asthma (2093 (693-4479)), and lowest in those with COPD (454 (0-2079)). There was a negative association between number of impairments and levels of PA. After adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity and education, and mutually adjusting for all other conditions and impairments, diabetes (Incident rate ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.83 (0.73-0.94)), COPD (0.76 (0.59-0.99)), a mobility impairment (0.63 (0.56-0.72)), a dexterity impairment (0.86 (0.75-0.98)), or a memory impairment (0.84 (0.72-0.99)) was negatively associated with PA. CONCLUSION: Future PA research requires consideration of the number and types of impairments that individuals experience, as well as assessing chronic conditions. This will improve understanding of the barriers to PA participation and inform interventions.

Analysis of national physical activity and sedentary behaviour policies in China.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to advance knowledge on physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) policies in China and to highlight related gaps and opportunities in the Chinese policy landscape. METHODS: Literature and web-based searches were performed to identify national PA and SB policies in China. We assessed which of the 17 elements of the Health-Enhancing Physical Activity Policy Audit Tool (HEPA PAT, version 2) are included in each of the policy documents and whether and how they address the 'cornerstones' of PA and SB policy: PA and SB guidelines, targets, surveillance and monitoring, and public education programmes. RESULTS: We found 60 national PA and SB policies, of which 54 focused on PA only and 6 focused on both PA and SB. There was a rapid increase in the number of policies issued between 2002 and 2021. In totality, the policies include all 17 key elements for a successful national policy approach to PA promotion according to the HEPA PAT. The policies reflect engagement from a range of sectors and encompass PA targets, recommendations for PA and SB, mandates and recommendations for school-related PA, plans for public education on PA, and plans for surveillance and monitoring of PA and SB. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that there has been increasing focus on PA and SB policies in China, which reflects efforts by policymakers to address the health burden of insufficient PA and excessive SB. More emphasis may be placed on SB in Chinese policy, particularly in terms of setting specific targets for population SB. Policymakers and other relevant public health stakeholders in China could also consider developing or adopting the 24-hour movement guidelines, in accordance with recent trends in several other countries. Collaboration and involvement of different sectors in the development and implementation of Chinese PA and SB policies should continue to be facilitated as part of a whole-of-system approach to health promotion.

What should all health professionals know about movement behaviour change? An international Delphi-based consensus statement.

The WHO has called for action to integrate physical activity promotion into healthcare settings, yet there is a lack of consensus on the competencies required by health professionals to deliver effective movement behaviour change support. The objective of this study was to establish key competencies relevant for all health professionals to support individuals to change their movement behaviours. Consensus was obtained using a three-phase Delphi process. Participants with expertise in physical activity and sedentary behaviour were asked to report what knowledge, skills and attributes they believed health professionals should possess in relation to movement behaviour change. Proposed competencies were developed and rated for importance. Participants were asked to indicate agreement for inclusion, with consensus defined as group level agreement of at least 80%. Participants from 11 countries, working in academic (55%), clinical (30%) or combined academic/clinical (13%) roles reached consensus on 11 competencies across 3 rounds (n=40, n=36 and n=34, respectively). Some competencies considered specific to certain disciplines did not qualify for inclusion. Participants agreed that health professionals should recognise, take ownership of, and practise interprofessional collaboration in supporting movement behaviour change; support positive culture around these behaviours; communicate using person-centred approaches that consider determinants, barriers and facilitators of movement behaviours; explain the health impacts of these behaviours; and recognise how their own behaviour influences movement behaviour change support. This consensus defines 11 competencies for health professionals, which may serve as a catalyst for building a culture of advocacy for movement behaviour change across health disciplines.

An evidence-based assessment of the impact of the Olympic Games on population levels of physical activity.

Pre-Olympic Games predictions commonly include an increase in population-based physical activity in the host city, as often stated in the bid, but the post-Olympic Games effects on physical activity have not been summarised. In this Series paper, we aim to do the following: examine mentions of a physical activity legacy in pre-Olympic bid documentation; analyse existing physical activity surveillance data collected before, during, and after the Olympic Games in hosting areas around the world; and evaluate Google Trends data surrounding the London 2012 Olympic Games as a case study of community interest in the topic of exercise during the time of the Olympic Games. Before 2007, little mention of physical activity was made in pre-Olympic Games documentation, but, after that, most documents had targets for population physical activity or sports participation. The synthesis of available surveillance data indicates that there was no change in the prevalence of physical activity or sports participation, except for the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing and the 1998 Winter Olympics in Nagano; although, the increase in participation in Nagano might not be attributable to the Olympic Games since there was no change in participation in winter sports. The Google Trends data showed an acute spike in searches with the term "Olympic" immediately associated with the London Olympic Games period and showed a sustained peri-Olympic increase in searches with the term "exercise". By themselves, the Olympic Games have not improved population-wide physical activity but might be an important missed public health opportunity. Such a legacy will require strategic planning and partnerships across the International Olympic Committee and the Olympic, sport, and public health agencies and a thorough evaluation framework implemented throughout the pre-Olympic Games and post-Olympic Games period in the host country.

International trends in screen-based behaviours from 2012 to 2019.

Many adults accumulate considerable time in screen-based behaviours, some of which have been associated with negative physical and psychological health outcomes. The aims of this study were to characterise contemporary patterns of screen-based behaviours and describe their temporal trends by global region, age, sex and education. Data covering the period 2012-2019 were obtained in aggregated form from GWI (previously known as Global Web Index), a global market research company. Temporal trends in the duration of adults' (16-64 years) self-reported personal computer, laptop and tablet use, mobile phone use, broadcast television viewing, online television viewing and games console use were described using data from over 2 million participants from 46 countries. For each activity, participants selected from response options ranging from less than 30 min to more than 10 h. Internationally, daily screen time increased from approximately 9 h in 2012 to 11 h in 2019, with notable increases in mobile phone use (approx. 2 h), online television viewing (approx. 37 min) and games console use (approx. 26 min). Differences were seen in the duration of time spent engaging in screen-based behaviours across regions and between socio-demographic groups, with Latin America, the Middle East and Africa and younger age groups seeing greater increases in overall screen time. The findings have important implications for health behaviour surveillance and for research exploring the links between screen-based behaviours and health.

A profile of children's physical activity data from the 2012 and 2015 health survey for England.

BACKGROUND: Low childhood physical activity levels constitute an important modifiable risk for adult non-communicable disease incidence and subsequent socio-economic burden, but few publications have explored age and sex related patterns within the UK population. The aims were to profile child physical activity data from the Health Survey for England from 2012 (1,732 respondents) and 2015 (5,346 respondents). METHODS: Reported physical activity episodes were converted to metabolic equivalents with reference to child-specific compendiums. Physical activity levels were aggregated for each domain, and again to produce total physical activity estimates. Contributions from each domain to total physical activity were explored, stratifying for age, sex, socio-economic deprivation, ethnicity, and weight status. Further analyses were run stratifying for physical activity levels. Few differences were detected between the survey iterations. RESULTS: Boys reported higher absolute levels of physical activity at all ages and across all domains. For boys and girls, informal activity reduces with age. For boys this reduction is largely mitigated by increased formal sport, but this is not the case for girls. Absolute levels of school activity and active travel remained consistent regardless of total physical activity, thereby comprising an increasingly important proportion of total physical activity for less active children. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend a specific focus on establishing and maintaining girl's participation in formal sport thorough their teenage years, and a recognition and consolidation of the important role played by active travel and school-based physical activity for the least active children.

'People don't get cancer, families do': Co-development of a social physical activity intervention for people recently affected by a cancer diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: This research took a co-design approach to develop a social intervention to support people affected by a cancer diagnosis to be physically active. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with five key stakeholder groups: (1) adults with a recent breast or prostate cancer diagnosis; (2) family and friends of cancer patients; (3) healthcare professionals; (4) physical activity providers; and (5) cancer charity representatives. Inductive content analysis was used to identify themes in the data. We then worked with a subset of participants to co-develop the intervention. RESULTS: Participants welcomed the idea of a social approach to a physical activity intervention. Input was received on the timing and format of delivery, how to communicate about physical activity to cancer patients and their family and friends and the types of physical activity that would be appropriate. Our findings suggest that interventions need to be flexible in terms of timing and delivery and offer a wide range of physical activity options. These findings directly informed the co-development of 'All Together Active'. CONCLUSION: All Together Active is designed to support cancer patients and their family and friends to be active throughout treatment and beyond, benefiting their physical and mental health.

Secreted Phosphoprotein 24 is a Biomarker of Mineral Metabolism.

The 24 kD form of secreted phosphoprotein (SPP-24), a cytokine-binding bone matrix protein with various truncated C-terminal products, is primarily synthesized by the liver. SPP-24 shares homology with fetuin-A, a potent vascular and soft tissue calcification inhibitor and SPP-24 is one component of calciprotein particles (CPPs), a circulating fetuin-mineral complex. The limited molecular evidence to date suggests that SPP-24 may also function as an inhibitor of bone formation and ectopic vascular calcification, potentially through bone morphogenic protein 2 (BMP-2) and Wnt-signaling mediated actions. The C-terminal products of SPP-24 bind to BMP-2 and attenuate BMP-2-induced bone formation. The aim of this study was to assess circulating SPP-24 in relation to kidney function and in concert with markers of mineral metabolism in humans. SPP-24 was measured in the serum of total of 192 subjects using ELISA-based measurements. Subjects were participants of one of two cohorts: (1) mGFR Cohort (n = 80) was participants of a study of measured GFR (mGFR) using inulin urinary clearance, recruited mostly from a chronic kidney disease clinic with low-range kidney function (eGFR 38.7 ± 25.0 mL/min/1.73 m2) and (2) CaMOS Cohort (n = 112) was a subset of randomly selected, community-dwelling participants of year 10 of the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study with eGFR in the normal range of 75.0 ± 15.9 mL/min/1.73 m2. In the combined cohort, the mean SPP-24 was 167.7 ± 101.1 ng/mL (range 33.4-633.6 ng/mL). The mean age was 66.5 ± 11.3, 57.1% female and mean eGFR (CKD-EPI) was 59.9 ± 27.0 mL/min/1.73 m2 (range 8-122 mL/min/1.73 m2). There was a strong inverse correlation between SPP-24 and eGFR (R = - 0.58, p < 0.001) that remained after adjustment for age. Following adjustment for age, eGFR, and sex, SPP-24 was significantly associated with phosphate (R = - 0.199), PTH (R = 0.298), and the Wnt-signaling inhibitor Dickkopf-related protein 1 (R = - 0.156). The results of this study indicate that SPP-24 is significantly altered by kidney function and is the first human data linking levels of SPP-24 to other biomarkers involved in mineral metabolism. Whether there is a role for circulating SPP-24 in bone formation and ectopic mineralization requires further study.

Exploring influences on evaluation practice: a case study of a national physical activity programme.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to improve physical activity behaviour are a core part of public health policy and practice. It is essential that we evaluate these interventions and use the evidence to inform decisions to improve population health. Evaluation of 'real-world' interventions provide an opportunity to generate practice-relevant evidence, however these interventions are difficult to evaluate. Various guidelines have been developed to facilitate evaluation, but evidence about their effectiveness in practice is limited. To explore influences on evaluation practice in an applied context, we conducted a case study of Sport England's 'Get Healthy Get Active' (GHGA) programme. This was a national programme that funded 33 projects that were delivered and evaluated across England. The programme was chosen as it was designed to generate evidence on the role of sport in increasing physical activity and improving health. The study aimed to explore and appraise whether strategies intended to facilitate project evaluation, including funder requirements to use a standardised evaluation framework and specific data collection methods, were effective in generating evidence that enabled the programme to meet its aims. METHODS: We applied a collective case study design involving 35 semi-structured interviews, and documentary analysis of multiple sources of evidence from 23 physical activity projects funded by GHGA. We applied thematic and framework analysis. We developed a logic model and mapped actual outcomes against intended outcomes. A narrative synthesis is provided. We discuss implications for the effective commissioning and evaluation of public health interventions. RESULTS: We identified five main themes of influences on evaluation practices that can act as barriers and facilitators to good practice: programme and project design; evaluation design; partnerships; resources; and organisational structures and systems. These influences are context-specific and operate through a complex set of interactions. CONCLUSION: Developing a better understanding of how influences on evaluation practice can act as facilitators or barriers is vital to help close current gaps in the evidence-based practice cycle. Critically, organisational structures and systems are needed to facilitate collaborative decision making; integration of projects and evaluation across partners organisations; transfer of knowldege and insights between stakeholders; and more rapid feedback and dissemination.

The Physical Activity Messaging Framework (PAMF) and Checklist (PAMC): International consensus statement and user guide.

Effective physical activity messaging plays an important role in the pathway towards changing physical activity behaviour at a population level. The Physical Activity Messaging Framework (PAMF) and Checklist (PAMC) are outputs from a recent modified Delphi study. This sought consensus from an international expert panel on how to aid the creation and evaluation of physical activity messages. In this paper, we (1) present an overview of the various concepts within the PAMF and PAMC, (2) discuss in detail how the PAMF and PAMC can be used to create physical activity messages, plan evaluation of messages, and aid understanding and categorisation of existing messages, and (3) highlight areas for future development and research. If adopted, we propose that the PAMF and PAMC could improve physical activity messaging practice by encouraging evidence-based and target population-focused messages with clearly stated aims and consideration of potential working pathways. They could also enhance the physical activity messaging research base by harmonising key messaging terminologies, improving quality of reporting, and aiding collation and synthesis of the evidence.

Tweeting about twenty: an analysis of interest, public sentiments and opinion about 20mph speed restrictions in two UK cities.

BACKGROUND: Twenty miles per hour (20mph) speed limits (equivalent to roughly 30kmh) have become part of public health policies to reduce urban road collisions and casualties, especially in Western countries. Public opinion plays a crucial role in opposition to and acceptance of policies that are advocated for improving public health. Twenty miles per hour speed limit policies were implemented in Edinburgh and Belfast from 2016 to 2018. In this paper, we extract public opinion and sentiments expressed about the new 20mph speed limits in those cities using publicly available Twitter data. METHODS: We analysed public sentiments from Twitter data and classified the public comments in plain English into the categories 'positive', 'neutral', and 'negative'. We also explored the frequency and sources of the tweets. RESULTS: The total volume of tweets was higher for Edinburgh than for Belfast, but the volume of tweets followed a similar pattern, peaking around 2016, which is when the schemes were implemented. Overall, the tone of the tweets was positive or neutral towards the implementation of the speed limit policies. This finding was surprising as there is a perception among policymakers that there would have been public backlash against these sorts of policy changes. The commonly used hashtags focused largely on road safety and other potential benefits, for example to air pollution. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, public attitudes towards the policies were positive, thus policymakers should be less anxious about potential public backlash when considering the scale-up of 20mph speed restrictions.

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

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: 1. To identify whether evaluation frameworks are reported to have been used within evaluation studies of physical activity interventions, and which frameworks have been used. 2. 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.

National physical activity and sedentary behaviour policies in 76 countries: availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on current, national physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB) policies is limited. We, therefore, analysed availability, comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness of PA and SB policies internationally. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Global Observatory for Physical Activity (GoPA!) Country Contacts from 173 countries were asked to provide data on their national PA and SB policies by completing GoPA! Policy Inventory. Data were collected for 76 countries (response rate = 44%). RESULTS: Formal written policies for PA and SB were found in 92% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86, 98) and 62% (95% CI: 50, 75) of countries, respectively. Sixty-two percent (95% CI: 51, 73) of countries have national PA guidelines, while 40% (95% CI: 29, 52) have SB guidelines. Fifty-two (95% CI: 40, 64) and 11% (95% CI: 3, 19) of countries have quantifiable national targets for PA and SB, respectively. The most represented ministries/departments involved in the promotion of more PA and/or less SB were in the sport (reported by 99% countries; 95% CI: 96, 100), health (97%; 95% CI: 94, 100), education (94%; 95% CI: 88, 100), and recreation and leisure (85%; 95% CI: 71, 99) sectors. The median score (0-10) for the comprehensiveness of PA and SB policies was 4 (95% CI: 4, 5) and 2 (95% CI: 2, 3), respectively. For PA and SB policy implementation it was 6 (95% CI: 5, 6). For the effectiveness of PA and SB policies it was 4 (95% CI: 3, 5) and 3 (95% CI: 2, 4), respectively. PA and SB policies were generally best developed in high-income countries and countries of European and Western-Pacific regions. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the included countries have PA policies, but their comprehensiveness, implementation, and effectiveness are generally low-to-moderate. SB policies are less available, comprehensive, implemented, and effective than PA policies. PA and SB policies are better developed in high-income countries, compared with low- and lower-middle-income countries, and in countries of European and Western-Pacific regions, compared with other world regions. More investment is needed in development and implementation of comprehensive and effective PA and SB policies, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income countries.

Advancing the global physical activity agenda: recommendations for future research by the 2020 WHO physical activity and sedentary behavior guidelines development group.

BACKGROUND: In July, 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) commenced work to update the 2010 Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health and established a Guideline Development Group (GDG) comprising expert public health scientists and practitioners to inform the drafting of the 2020 Guidelines on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior. The overall task of the GDG was to review the scientific evidence and provide expert advice to the WHO on the amount of physical activity and sedentary behavior associated with optimal health in children and adolescents, adults, older adults (> 64 years), and also specifically in pregnant and postpartum women and people living with chronic conditions or disabilities. METHODS: The GDG reviewed the available evidence specific to each sub-population using systematic protocols and in doing so, identified a number of gaps in the existing literature. These proposed research gaps were discussed and verified by expert consensus among the entire GDG. RESULTS: Evidence gaps across population sub-groups included a lack of information on: 1) the precise shape of the dose-response curve between physical activity and/or sedentary behavior and several of the health outcomes studied; 2) the health benefits of light-intensity physical activity and of breaking up sedentary time with light-intensity activity; 3) differences in the health effects of different types and domains of physical activity (leisure-time; occupational; transportation; household; education) and of sedentary behavior (occupational; screen time; television viewing); and 4) the joint association between physical activity and sedentary time with health outcomes across the life course. In addition, we acknowledge the need to conduct more population-based studies in low- and middle-income countries and in people living with disabilities and/or chronic disease, and to identify how various sociodemographic factors (age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status) modify the health effects of physical activity, in order to address global health disparities. CONCLUSIONS: Although the 2020 WHO Guidelines for Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior were informed by the most up-to-date research on the health effects of physical activity and sedentary time, there is still substantial work to be done in advancing the global physical activity agenda.

Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age.

BACKGROUND: Adults spend a majority of their time outside the workplace being sedentary. Large amounts of sedentary behaviour increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and both all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality. OBJECTIVES: Primary • To assess effects on sedentary time of non-occupational interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age Secondary • To describe other health effects and adverse events or unintended consequences of these interventions • To determine whether specific components of interventions are associated with changes in sedentary behaviour • To identify if there are any differential effects of interventions based on health inequalities (e.g. age, sex, income, employment) SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SportDiscus, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 14 April 2020. We checked references of included studies, conducted forward citation searching, and contacted authors in the field to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster RCTs of interventions outside the workplace for community-dwelling adults aged 18 to 59 years. We included studies only when the intervention had a specific aim or component to change sedentary behaviour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles for study eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted trial authors for additional information or data when required. We examined the following primary outcomes: device-measured sedentary time, self-report sitting time, self-report TV viewing time, and breaks in sedentary time. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 trials involving 1770 participants, all undertaken in high-income countries. Ten were RCTs and three were cluster RCTs. The mean age of study participants ranged from 20 to 41 years. A majority of participants were female. All interventions were delivered at the individual level. Intervention components included personal monitoring devices, information or education, counselling, and prompts to reduce sedentary behaviour. We judged no study to be at low risk of bias across all domains. Seven studies were at high risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessment due to use of self-report outcomes measures. Primary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably show little or no difference in device-measured sedentary time in the short term (mean difference (MD) -8.36 min/d, 95% confidence interval (CI) -27.12 to 10.40; 4 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions reduce device-measured sedentary time in the medium term (MD -51.37 min/d, 95% CI -126.34 to 23.59; 3 studies; I² = 84%; very low-certainty evidence) We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self-report sitting time in the short term (MD -64.12 min/d, 95% CI -260.91 to 132.67; I² = 86%; very low-certainty evidence). Interventions outside the workplace may show little or no difference in self-report TV viewing time in the medium term (MD -12.45 min/d, 95% CI -50.40 to 25.49; 2 studies; I² = 86%; low-certainty evidence) or in the long term (MD 0.30 min/d, 95% CI -0.63 to 1.23; 2 studies; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). It was not possible to pool the five studies that reported breaks in sedentary time given the variation in definitions used. Secondary outcomes Interventions outside the workplace probably have little or no difference on body mass index in the medium term (MD -0.25 kg/m², 95% CI -0.48 to -0.01; 3 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference in waist circumference in the medium term (MD -2.04 cm, 95% CI -9.06 to 4.98; 2 studies; I² = 65%; low-certainty evidence). Interventions probably have little or no difference on glucose in the short term (MD -0.18 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.06; 2 studies; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) and medium term (MD -0.08 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.05; 2 studies, I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence) Interventions outside the workplace may have little or no difference in device-measured MVPA in the short term (MD 1.99 min/d, 95% CI -4.27 to 8.25; 4 studies; I² = 23%; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions improve device-measured MVPA in the medium term (MD 6.59 min/d, 95% CI -7.35 to 20.53; 3 studies; I² = 70%; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace improve self-reported light-intensity PA in the short-term (MD 156.32 min/d, 95% CI 34.34 to 278.31; 2 studies; I² = 79%; very low-certainty evidence). Interventions may have little or no difference on step count in the short-term (MD 226.90 steps/day, 95% CI -519.78 to 973.59; 3 studies; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence) No data on adverse events or symptoms were reported in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Interventions outside the workplace to reduce sedentary behaviour probably lead to little or no difference in device-measured sedentary time in the short term, and we are uncertain if they reduce device-measured sedentary time in the medium term. We are uncertain whether interventions outside the workplace reduce self-reported sitting time in the short term. Interventions outside the workplace may result in little or no difference in self-report TV viewing time in the medium or long term. The certainty of evidence is moderate to very low, mainly due to concerns about risk of bias, inconsistent findings, and imprecise results. Future studies should be of longer duration; should recruit participants from varying age, socioeconomic, or ethnic groups; and should gather quality of life, cost-effectiveness, and adverse event data. We strongly recommend that standard methods of data preparation and analysis are adopted to allow comparison of the effects of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour.

A scoping review of evaluation frameworks and their applicability to real-world physical activity and dietary change programme evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity and dietary change programmes play a central role in addressing public health priorities. Programme evaluation contributes to the evidence-base about these programmes; and helps justify and inform policy, programme and funding decisions. A range of evaluation frameworks have been published, but there is uncertainty about their usability and applicability to different programmes and evaluation objectives, and the extent to which they are appropriate for practitioner-led or researcher-led evaluation. This review appraises the frameworks that may be applicable to evaluation of physical activity and/or dietary change programmes, and develops a typology of the frameworks to help guide decision making by practitioners, commissioners and evaluators. METHODS: A scoping review approach was used. This included a systematic search and consultation with evaluation experts to identify evaluation frameworks and to develop a set of evaluation components to appraise them. Data related to each framework's general characteristics and components were extracted. This was used to construct a typology of the frameworks based on their intended programme type, evaluation objective and format. Each framework was then mapped against the evaluation components to generate an overview of the guidance included within each framework. RESULTS: The review identified 71 frameworks. These were described variously in terms of purpose, content, or applicability to different programme contexts. The mapping of frameworks highlighted areas of overlap and strengths and limitations in the available guidance. Gaps within the frameworks which may warrant further development included guidance on participatory approaches, non-health and unanticipated outcomes, wider contextual and implementation factors, and sustainability. CONCLUSIONS: Our typology and mapping signpost to frameworks where guidance on specific components can be found, where there is overlap, and where there are gaps in the guidance. Practitioners and evaluators can use these to identify, agree upon and apply appropriate frameworks. Researchers can use them to identify evaluation components where there is already guidance available and where further development may be useful. This should help focus research efforts where it is most needed and promote the uptake and use of evaluation frameworks in practice to improve the quality of evaluation and reporting.

How are we measuring physical activity and sedentary behaviour in the four home nations of the UK? A narrative review of current surveillance measures and future directions.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe the comparability between the surveys of the UK home nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales) that monitor compliance with the Chief Medical Officers' physical activity (PA) recommendations. We also suggest ways to improve the UK national PA and sedentary behaviour (SB) surveillance systems. METHODS: We identified national surveys that monitor PA and SB through searching UK-wide and devolved administration websites, the Global Observatory for Physical Activity Country Cards and the Active Healthy Kids Report Cards. Subsequently, we extracted information from survey documentation on the survey commissioners and contractors, method of administration, current questionnaire details relevant to the PA recommendations, questionnaire changes over the previous decade and the most recent prevalence figures. RESULTS: For adults and older adults, five surveys assess the moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) recommendation, three assess muscle strengthening and three assess SB. For older adults only, three assess balance and co-ordination. For children, seven assess MVPA, none assess muscle strengthening and five assess SB. Only one survey reports on the under 5 PA recommendation. There is no part of the recommendations for which comparable estimates can be calculated across all four home nations. The greatest variation is among the SB questions and reporting. No survey has regularly used device-based measures. CONCLUSION: UK surveillance of the PA recommendations is complex, undertaken separately in the home nations, using multiple surveys that cover adults and children separately. We recommend that the costs and benefits of harmonising the existing questionnaires are considered, along with the potential introduction of device-based measures.

Maximising the impact of global and national physical activity guidelines: the critical role of communication strategies.

OBJECTIVES: Physical activity guidelines are evidence-based statements on recommended physical activity levels for good health. Guidelines, in isolation, are unlikely to increase population levels of physical activity; appropriate and effective communication is fundamental to maximising their impact. The aim of this paper is to provide a planning framework for physical activity guideline communication, including an overview of key audiences, aims and approaches. METHODS: All authors considered and agreed on the three broad issues to address by consensus. We identified key sources of evidence through scoping of the literature and our knowledge of the research area. RESULTS: Whether guidelines are global or national, communication of the physical activity guidelines should be informed by: (1) a situational analysis that considers the context in which the communication will take place and (2) a stakeholder analysis to determine the key target audiences for the communication and their values, needs and preferences. Audiences include policy-makers within and outside the health sector, other key stakeholders, the general public, specific population subgroups, health professionals and non-health professionals with a role in physical activity promotion. The aims and approach to communication will differ depending on the target audience. CONCLUSION: Communication to raise awareness and knowledge of the physical activity guidelines must be supported by policies, environments and opportunities for physical activity. Besides the intrinsic value of the physical activity guidelines, it is essential that substantial effort is put in to diligently planning, funding and implementing their communication from the outset.