↓ Skip to main content

Development and feasibility study of very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Development and feasibility study of very brief interventions for physical activity in primary care
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1703-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Pears, Katie Morton, Maaike Bijker, Stephen Sutton, Wendy Hardeman

Abstract

There is increasing interest in brief and very brief behaviour change interventions for physical activity as they are potentially scalable to the population level. However, few very brief interventions (VBIs) have been published, and evidence is lacking about their feasibility, acceptability and which 'active ingredients' (behaviour change techniques) would maximise their effectiveness. The aim of this research was to identify and develop promising VBIs for physical activity and test their feasibility and acceptability in the context of preventive health checks in primary care. The process included two stages, guided by four criteria: effectiveness, feasibility, acceptability, and cost. In Stage 1, we used an iterative approach informed by systematic reviews, a scoping review of BCTs, team discussion, stakeholder consultation, a qualitative study, and cost estimation to guide the development of promising VBIs. In Stage 2, a feasibility study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of the short-listed VBIs, using tape-recordings and interviews with practitioners (n = 4) and patients (n = 68), to decide which VBIs merited further evaluation in a pilot trial. Four VBIs were short-listed: Motivational intervention; Action Planning intervention; Pedometer intervention; and Physical Activity Diary intervention. All were deliverable in around five minutes and were feasible and acceptable to participants and practitioners. Based on the results of interviews with practitioners and patients, techniques from the VBIs were combined into three new VBIs for further evaluation in a pilot trial. Using a two-stage approach, in which we considered the practicability of VBIs (acceptability, feasibility and cost) alongside potential efficacy from the outset, we developed a short-list of four promising VBIs for physical activity and demonstrated that they were acceptable and feasible as part of a preventive health check in primary care. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN02863077 . Registered 5 October 2012.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 104 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 36%
Researcher 18 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Unspecified 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 33 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 22%
Unspecified 16 15%
Psychology 16 15%
Sports and Recreations 6 6%
Other 12 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 24 December 2015.
All research outputs
#2,305,009
of 11,350,261 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,249
of 7,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,189
of 209,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#79
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,350,261 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 209,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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 65% of its contemporaries.