Centre for Primary Care and Public Health, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2013 Feb 6;10:18. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-10-18.
Walking groups are increasingly being set up but little is known about their efficacy in promoting physical activity. The present study aims to assess the efficacy of interventions to promote walking in groups to promoting physical activity within adults, and to explore potential moderators of this efficacy.
Systematic literature review searches were conducted using multiple databases. A random effect model was used for the meta-analysis, with sensitivity analysis.
The effect of the interventions (19 studies, 4 572 participants) on physical activity was of medium size (d = 0.52), statistically significant (95%CI 0.32 to 0.71, p < 0.0001), and with large fail-safe of N = 753. Moderator analyses showed that lower quality studies had larger effect sizes than higher quality studies, studies reporting outcomes over six months had larger effect sizes than studies reporting outcomes up to six months, studies that targeted both genders had higher effect sizes than studies that targeted only women, studies that targeted older adults had larger effect sizes than studies that targeted younger adults. No significant differences were found between studies delivered by professionals and those delivered by lay people.
Interventions to promote walking in groups are efficacious at increasing physical activity. Despite low homogeneity of results, and limitations (e.g. small number of studies using objective measures of physical activity, publication bias), which might have influence the findings, the large fail-safe N suggests these findings are robust. Possible explanations for heterogeneity between studies are discussed, and the need for more investigation of this is highlighted.
越来越多的步行团体正在成立,但人们对其促进身体活动的效果知之甚少。本研究旨在评估以小组形式促进步行的干预措施对促进成年人身体活动的效果,并探讨这种效果的潜在调节因素。
使用多个数据库进行系统文献检索。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,并进行敏感性分析。
干预措施(19 项研究,4572 名参与者)对身体活动的影响为中等大小(d=0.52),具有统计学意义(95%CI 0.32 至 0.71,p<0.0001),且具有 753 个 N 的较大失效安全值。调节分析表明,质量较低的研究比质量较高的研究具有更大的效应大小,报告 6 个月以上结果的研究比报告 6 个月内结果的研究具有更大的效应大小,同时针对两性的研究比仅针对女性的研究具有更高的效应大小,针对老年人的研究比针对年轻人的研究具有更大的效应大小。专业人员和非专业人员开展的研究之间没有发现显著差异。
以小组形式促进步行的干预措施在增加身体活动方面是有效的。尽管结果的同质性低,且存在局限性(例如,使用身体活动的客观测量的研究数量较少,存在发表偏倚),这些可能会影响研究结果,但较大的失效安全 N 表明这些发现是可靠的。讨论了研究之间异质性的可能解释,并强调需要进一步研究这一问题。