Rigby Benjamin P, Dodd-Reynolds Caroline J, Oliver Emily J
1Department of Sociology, Durham University, 32 Old Elvet, Durham, DH1 3HN UK.
2NINE Doctoral Training Partnership, C/O Faculty of Social Sciences & Health, Durham University, Arthur Holmes Building, Durham, DH1 3LE UK.
Public Health Rev. 2020 Mar 13;41:4. doi: 10.1186/s40985-020-00119-4. eCollection 2020.
Outdoor walking groups are widely-used programmes aimed at improving physical activity and health outcomes. Despite being promoted as accessible and inclusive, emerging work highlights participation biases based on gender, age and socioeconomic status, for example. To explicate the impact of outdoor walking groups on physical activity inequities, we conducted a scoping review of published outdoor walking group literatures. Specifically, we critically examined: (a) equity integration strategies; (b) intervention reach; (c) effectiveness; and (d) potential social determinants of engagement relating to the World Health Organization's conceptual framework.
Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review protocol was used to develop a comprehensive search strategy and identify relevant academic and grey literatures, which were screened using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were organised by Cochrane PROGRESS-Plus equity characteristics and a narrative summary was presented for each thematic area.
Sixty-two publications were included. Key findings were: (a) some evidence of targeted intervention trials. Large-scale national programmes were tailored to regional activity and health needs, which may contribute toward addressing inequities. However, participant demographics seldom informed reported analyses; (b) participation was more likely among white, more socioeconomically advantaged, middle-to-older aged, female and able-bodied adults; (c) positive physical and psychological outcomes were unlikely to extend along social gradients; and (d) interventions primarily addressed intermediary determinants (e.g. psychosocial barriers; material resource). Social capital (e.g. friend-making) was identified as potentially important for addressing physical activity inequalities.
The published literature on outdoor walking groups leaves unanswered questions regarding participation inequalities, with implications for future physical activity promotion. Currently, participation in outdoor walking groups is typically more prevalent among advantaged subpopulations. We make recommendations for research and practice to address these issues, as well as aid the translation of existing knowledge into practice. We advocate increased focus on the social determinants of engagement. A more consistent approach to collecting and analysing participant socio-demographic data is required. Our findings also support recommendations that appropriate tailoring of universal programmes to community needs and embedding strategies to increase social cohesion are important in developing equitable programmes.
户外步行团体是旨在促进身体活动和改善健康状况的广泛应用的项目。尽管这类项目被宣传为易于参与且具有包容性,但新出现的研究表明,存在基于性别、年龄和社会经济地位等的参与偏差。为了阐明户外步行团体对身体活动不平等的影响,我们对已发表的户外步行团体文献进行了一项范围综述。具体而言,我们批判性地审视了:(a)公平整合策略;(b)干预覆盖范围;(c)有效性;以及(d)与世界卫生组织概念框架相关的参与的潜在社会决定因素。
采用阿克西和奥马利的范围综述方案来制定全面的检索策略,并识别相关的学术文献和灰色文献,使用预先定义的纳入和排除标准对其进行筛选。数据按照Cochrane PROGRESS - Plus公平特征进行整理,并针对每个主题领域给出叙述性总结。
纳入了62篇出版物。主要发现如下:(a)有一些针对性干预试验的证据。大规模的国家项目根据地区活动和健康需求进行了调整,这可能有助于解决不平等问题。然而,参与者的人口统计学特征很少在报告的分析中得到体现;(b)白人、社会经济地位更优越、中老年人、女性和身体健全的成年人更有可能参与;(c)积极的身体和心理结果不太可能沿着社会梯度延伸;(d)干预主要针对中间决定因素(如心理社会障碍;物质资源)。社会资本(如交朋友)被认为对于解决身体活动不平等可能很重要。
已发表的关于户外步行团体的文献留下了关于参与不平等的未解答问题,这对未来身体活动促进具有启示意义。目前,户外步行团体的参与在优势亚人群中通常更为普遍。我们针对研究和实践提出建议以解决这些问题,并帮助将现有知识转化为实践。我们主张更多地关注参与的社会决定因素。需要采用更一致的方法来收集和分析参与者的社会人口学数据。我们的研究结果还支持以下建议,即在制定公平的项目时,根据社区需求对通用项目进行适当调整以及嵌入增加社会凝聚力的策略很重要。