↓ Skip to main content

What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Preventive Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
37 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
What do we know about brief interventions for physical activity that could be delivered in primary care consultations? A systematic review of reviews
Published in
Preventive Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.02.017
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Lamming, Sally Pears, Dan Mason, Katie Morton, Maaike Bijker, Stephen Sutton, Wendy Hardeman

Abstract

This systematic review of reviews aims to investigate how brief interventions (BIs) are defined, whether they increase physical activity, which factors influence their effectiveness, who they are effective for, and whether they are feasible and acceptable. We searched CINAHL, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, DARE, HTA database, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index-Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network from their inception until May 2015 to identify systematic reviews of the effectiveness of BIs aimed at promoting physical activity in adults, reporting a physical activity outcome and at least one BI that could be delivered in a primary care setting. A narrative synthesis was conducted. We identified three specific BI reviews and thirteen general reviews of physical activity interventions that met the inclusion criteria. The BI reviews reported varying definitions of BIs, only one of which specified a maximum duration of 30min. BIs can increase self-reported physical activity in the short term, but there is insufficient evidence about their long-term impact, their impact on objectively measured physical activity, and about the factors that influence their effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability. Current definitions include BIs that are too long for primary care consultations. Practitioners, commissioners and policy makers should be aware of this when interpreting evidence about BIs, and future research should develop and evaluate very brief interventions (of 5min or less) that could be delivered in a primary care consultation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 8 9%
Other 17 18%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Sports and Recreations 13 14%
Psychology 8 9%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 24 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 27 December 2019.
All research outputs
#663,851
of 16,030,274 outputs
Outputs from Preventive Medicine
#321
of 3,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,504
of 263,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Preventive Medicine
#8
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,030,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 263,045 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.