↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the Heart Wise Exercise™ program: a model for safe community exercise programming

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
Evaluating the Heart Wise Exercise™ program: a model for safe community exercise programming
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-2866-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer L. Reed, Jennifer M. Harris, Liz Midence, Elizabeth B. Yee, Sherry L. Grace

Abstract

Greater availability of community exercise facilities is recommended to promote physical activity in the large number of people with chronic disease. The Heart Wise Exercise (HWE) program encourages existing community-based exercise facilities to build capacity to serve such patients, by working with interested facilities to ensure they meet safety criteria, and educating exercise leaders. Using a piloted checklist, 45 HWE programs were audited for the six HWE criteria (outlined below) in the greater Ottawa and Toronto areas of Ontario, Canada. A survey was also administered to a convenience sample of HWE program participants (N = 127). Criteria 1: 71 % of leaders encouraged daily aerobic exercise; participants reported engaging in 194 min/week of aerobic exercise. Criteria 2: 100 % of programs incorporated a warm-up and cool-down, and 84 % encouraged self-monitoring during class. Criteria 3: 98 % of programs offered options for participants to exercise at their appropriate intensity. Criteria 4: HWE participants reported having chronic conditions including arthritis (41 %), osteoporosis (26 %) diabetes (8 %), heart disease (6 %) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6 %). Criteria 5: 93 % of instructors offered health screening for participants. Criteria 6: 100 % of sites had automated external defibrillators, and 90 % of the instructors were aware of the documented emergency plan. The exercise leaders reported being 'knowledgeable/comfortable/confident' in providing exercise guidance to, and having clients with chronic health conditions; directing clients to other services; offering exercise intensity options; helping clients listen to their bodies; and, encouraging clients to provide information regarding their health. The participants reported being, on average, 'somewhat happy' to 'very happy' with HWE locations; program dates and times; leaders' knowledge of disease and exercise; exercise intensity; cost; and, social aspect. HWE programs are safe and appropriate for persons with varying chronic health conditions, and participants are satisfied with and will likely continue attending their HWE classes. Future efforts should be directed at increasing awareness of HWE programs among referring healthcare professionals and participants at risk of chronic conditions. The HWE training program should emphasize that HWE leaders regularly encourage self-monitoring and daily aerobic exercise, which is well-known to reduce the burden of many chronic diseases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 98 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Researcher 5 5%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 27 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 14%
Sports and Recreations 11 11%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 32 32%

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 19 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,953,405
of 7,924,725 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,941
of 6,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,371
of 286,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#99
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,924,725 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 61st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,837 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
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 286,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.