1 / 14

Background

Social inequalities in physical activity: do environmental and policy interventions help reduce the gap? A pilot systematic review David Humphreys 1 & David Ogilvie 1,2 1 CEDAR, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge 2 MRC Epidemiology Unit, Cambridge

claire-crawford
Download Presentation

Background

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social inequalities in physical activity: do environmental and policy interventions help reduce the gap? A pilot systematic review David Humphreys1 & David Ogilvie1,2 1 CEDAR, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge 2 MRC Epidemiology Unit, Cambridge CEDAR-ISAG scientific meeting, 24th January 2012

  2. Background • Opportunities to physically active may be limited by social position or group membership. • There is limited evidence about the social distribution of effectiveness within interventions to improve physical activity. • Such information is required as we implement more universal interventions.

  3. Research Aims Aims of this pilot: a) To assess the availability of information on the social distribution of: • intervention effects • targeting or allocation of interventions • baseline information on participants b) To determine whether sufficient information is available for a full evidence synthesis

  4. Method Stages: • Review of reviews • Review of primary studies Search strategy: • Active Living Research reference lists 2002-2010 http://activelivingresearch.org/resourcesearch/referencelist

  5. Inclusion Criteria • Types of study: • Stage 1: Systematic reviews or meta-analyses • Stage 2: Primary intervention studies • Type of intervention: Environmental & Policy • Type of outcome: Change in physical activity

  6. Coding Matrix • Social inequalities - “PROGRESS-Plus” framework – Cochrane/ Campbell Equity Methods Group (e.g.)

  7. Stage 1: Review of Reviews Study search: Active Living Research reference lists 2446 primary studies excluded 2586 abstracts scanned 4 reviews not found in ALR included 140 reviews collected for full text screening 125 reviews excluded 19 reviews obtained and coded

  8. Stage 1: Results

  9. Stage 2: Review of Primary Studies Pooled 203 non-duplicated studies from systematic reviews 92 studies currently unavailable 111 studies collected 50 studies coded to date 20 studies excluded 30 studies analysed

  10. Stage 2: Results

  11. Summary & Future Directions • Assessing existing research through an “equity lens” • Current systematic reviews lack information • There may be information from existing primary studies to synthesise distributional effects Future directions: • Finish coding primary studies • Pilot synthesis • Development of a full systematic review

  12. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work was undertaken by the Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), a UKCRC Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. Funding from the British Heart Foundation, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research, and the Wellcome Trust, under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged.

More Related