↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of insufficiently active participants that benefit from health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) promotion programs implemented in the sports club setting

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Characteristics of insufficiently active participants that benefit from health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) promotion programs implemented in the sports club setting
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5579-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda Ooms, Chantal Leemrijse, Dorine Collard, Nicolette Schipper-van Veldhoven, Cindy Veenhof

Abstract

Health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) promotion programs are implemented in sports clubs. The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics of the insufficiently active participants that benefit from these programs. Data of three sporting programs, developed for insufficiently active adults, were used for this study. These sporting programs were implemented in different sports clubs in the Netherlands. Participants completed an online questionnaire at baseline and after six months (n = 458). Of this sample, 35.1% (n = 161) was insufficiently active (i.e. not meeting HEPA levels) at baseline. Accordingly, two groups were compared: participants who were insufficiently active at baseline, but increased their physical activity to HEPA levels after six months (activated group, n = 86) versus participants who were insufficiently active both at baseline and after six months (non-activated group, n = 75). Potential associated characteristics (demographic, social, sport history, physical activity) were included as independent variables in bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The percentage of active participants increased significantly from baseline to six months (from 64.9 to 76.9%, p < 0.05). The bivariate logistic regression analyses showed that participants in the activated group were more likely to receive support from family members with regard to their sport participation (62.8% vs. 42.7%, p = 0.02) and spent more time in moderate-intensity physical activity (128 ± 191 min/week vs. 70 ± 106 min/week, p = 0.02) at baseline compared with participants in the non-activated group. These results were confirmed in the multivariate logistic regression analyses: when receiving support from most family members, there is a 216% increase in the odds of being in the activated group (OR = 2.155; 95% CI: 1.118-4.154, p = 0.02) and for each additional 1 min/week spent in moderate-intensity physical activity, the odds increases with 0.3% (OR = 1.003; 95% CI: 1.001-1.006, p = 0.02). The results suggest that HEPA sporting programs can be used to increase HEPA levels of insufficiently active people, but it seems a challenge to reach the least active ones. It is important that promotional strategies and channels are tailored to the target group. Furthermore, strategies that promote family support may enhance the impact of the programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 7 24%
Unknown 8 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 6 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Psychology 2 7%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 10 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,282,386
of 24,875,286 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,993
of 16,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,122
of 336,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#248
of 318 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,875,286 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,507 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 318 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.