• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

信息型爬楼梯干预对超重行人的效果更大。

An informational stair climbing intervention with greater effects in overweight pedestrians.

机构信息

Loughborough University, UK.

出版信息

Health Educ Res. 2010 Dec;25(6):936-44. doi: 10.1093/her/cyq043. Epub 2010 Sep 16.

DOI:10.1093/her/cyq043
PMID:20847107
Abstract

Previous interventions have successfully increased levels of stair climbing in public-access settings (e.g. malls). This study used robust methods to establish the magnitude of intervention effects among a specific target group-the overweight. Ascending stair/escalator users (N = 20 807) were observed in a mall. A 2-week baseline was followed by a 5-week intervention in which message banners, promoting stair climbing, were attached to the stair risers. Standardized silhouettes were used to code individuals as normal/overweight. Logistic regression analyses were conducted with stair/escalator choice as the outcome variable and weight status entered as a moderator alongside condition, gender, ethnicity and 'pedestrian traffic volume'. Overall, the intervention significantly increased the rate of stair climbing [odds ratio (OR) = 1.28, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.08-1.53], with the effects sustained over 5 weeks. There were differential effects between weight categories, with greater increases in overweight (OR = 1.95, CI = 1.34-2.83) versus normal weight individuals (OR = 1.29, CI = 1.09-1.53). In conclusion, message prompts produced larger effects among overweight individuals, who could benefit most from stair climbing. The public health value of these interventions may, therefore, be greater than realized. The heightened effects among the overweight were likely due to the salience of the current message, which linked stair climbing with the target of weight control.

摘要

先前的干预措施已成功提高了公共场所(如购物中心)的楼梯攀爬水平。本研究采用稳健的方法,在特定目标群体(超重人群)中确定干预效果的大小。在一个购物中心观察了楼梯/自动扶梯的使用者(N=20807)。在基线期为 2 周后,进行了为期 5 周的干预,在楼梯梯级上贴上了宣传爬楼梯的标语横幅。使用标准化的剪影来对个体进行分类,分为正常/超重。将体重状况作为协变量与条件、性别、种族和“行人流量”一起输入,以楼梯/自动扶梯选择作为因变量进行逻辑回归分析。总体而言,干预显著增加了楼梯攀爬率[优势比(OR)=1.28,95%置信区间(CI)=1.08-1.53],且效果持续 5 周。体重类别之间存在差异效应,超重者(OR=1.95,CI=1.34-2.83)的增幅大于正常体重者(OR=1.29,CI=1.09-1.53)。总之,信息提示对超重者的效果更大,而超重者最能从爬楼梯中受益。因此,这些干预措施的公共健康价值可能比预期的要大。超重者的效果增强可能是由于当前信息的突出性,该信息将爬楼梯与体重控制的目标联系起来。

相似文献

1
An informational stair climbing intervention with greater effects in overweight pedestrians.信息型爬楼梯干预对超重行人的效果更大。
Health Educ Res. 2010 Dec;25(6):936-44. doi: 10.1093/her/cyq043. Epub 2010 Sep 16.
2
Promoting stair climbing: stair-riser banners are better than posters... sometimes.推广爬楼梯:楼梯竖板横幅有时比海报效果更好。
Prev Med. 2008 Apr;46(4):308-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.11.009. Epub 2007 Nov 22.
3
A statistical summary of mall-based stair-climbing interventions.基于商场的爬楼梯干预措施的统计总结。
J Phys Act Health. 2011 May;8(4):558-65. doi: 10.1123/jpah.8.4.558.
4
Six-month observational study of prompted stair climbing.对提示性爬楼梯的六个月观察性研究。
Prev Med. 2001 Nov;33(5):422-7. doi: 10.1006/pmed.2001.0908.
5
Promoting stair climbing: intervention effects generalize to a subsequent stair ascent.促进爬楼梯:干预效果可推广至后续的楼梯攀登。
Am J Health Promot. 2007 Nov-Dec;22(2):114-9. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-22.2.114.
6
A workplace intervention to promote stair climbing: greater effects in the overweight.一项促进爬楼梯的工作场所干预措施:对超重者效果更佳。
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2006 Dec;14(12):2210-6. doi: 10.1038/oby.2006.259.
7
Effects of environmental changes in a stair climbing intervention: generalization to stair descent.爬楼梯干预中环境变化的影响:对下楼梯的推广。
Am J Health Promot. 2007 Sep-Oct;22(1):38-44. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-22.1.38.
8
Promoting physical activity in a low socioeconomic area: results from an intervention targeting stair climbing.促进低社会经济地区的身体活动:针对爬楼梯的干预措施的结果。
Prev Med. 2011 May;52(5):352-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.03.004. Epub 2011 Mar 22.
9
Review Article: Increasing physical activity with point-of-choice prompts--a systematic review.综述文章:利用选择点提示增加身体活动——系统综述。
Scand J Public Health. 2010 Aug;38(6):633-8. doi: 10.1177/1403494810375865. Epub 2010 Jul 2.
10
Worksite interventions to increase stair climbing; reasons for caution.增加爬楼梯的工作场所干预措施;谨慎行事的原因。
Prev Med. 2006 Jul;43(1):4-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2006.03.011. Epub 2006 May 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Choice architecture interventions to change physical activity and sedentary behavior: a systematic review of effects on intention, behavior and health outcomes during and after intervention.选择架构干预措施对改变身体活动和久坐行为的影响:干预期间和之后对意图、行为和健康结果的系统评价。
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Apr 7;17(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-00942-7.
2
Signage Interventions for Stair Climbing at Work: More than 700,000 Reasons for Caution.工作场所楼梯攀爬的标识干预措施:超过 70 万条需要谨慎的理由。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 8;16(19):3782. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193782.
3
Is there any Proffitt in stair climbing? A headcount of studies testing for demographic differences in choice of stairs.
爬楼梯时有 Proffitt 吗?对选择楼梯的人口统计学差异进行研究的人数统计。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2014 Feb;21(1):71-7. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0463-7.