Skip to main content

Table 3 Under what conditions group-based physical activity interventions are effective

From: Understanding for whom, under what conditions, and how group-based physical activity interventions are successful: a realist review

  Design Recruitment procedures Program setting Measures
Positive effect group-versus-individuals/aggregate (n =39) Randomized with control (n =13) Recruitment Strategies Program Location Physical Activity Outcome
 Mass or local media (n=11)  Medical center (n =3)  Subjective (n =23)
Quasi-experimental with control (n =8)  Word of Mouth (n=3)  Fitness facility (n =4)  Objective (n =6)
 Physician Referral (n=5)  University (n =3)  Mix (n =10)
Quasi-experimental without control (n =3)  Flyers (n=11)  Worksite (n =5) ITT
Pre-post design (n =15)  Center-based (n=7)  General community (n=5)  Yes (n =6)
 Employer’s Worksite (n=5)  Faith-based location (n =2)  No (n =39)
 Faith-based (n=5)  Center-based (n =3) Reported Costs
 Target Mailings (n=16)  Other (n =7)  Yes (n =5)
 Targeted Contact (n=8)  Not reported (n =7)  No (n =34
 Presentation/Seminar (n=8) Country Timing of Post-Program Assessment
 Other (n=2)  USA (n =33)  14.75 weeks (±31.69)
 Not Reported (n=2)  Canada (n =3) Moderation Analyses
Sample Selection  Middle East (n =2) (n=4 interventions)
 Convenience Sampling (n =2)  Australia (n =1)  Gender (n=2)
 Random Selection (n =5) Average Setting Sample Size  Age (n=1)
 Targeted (n =26)  17.76 (±31.39)  Baseline activity level (n=2)
 Convenience and Targeted (n =1) Average Setting Adoption Rate  Self-monitoring (n=1)
 Random and Targeted (n =3)  77.25 % (±25.55 %)  Member Diversity (n=1)
 Not specified (n=2)  Not report (n =31)  Perceived health (n=1)
Physician Referral  Distance to Group Sessions (n=1)
 Yes (n=5)  Socio-economic status (n=2)
 No (n =34)
Group-versus-group interventions (n =9) Randomized with control (n =3) Recruitment Strategies Program Location Physical Activity Outcome
 Mass or local media (n=2)  Medical center (n =3)  Subjective (n=2)
 Word of Mouth (n=3)  Faith-based location (n =2)  Objective (n=0)
Quasi-experimental with control (n =4)  Physician Referral (n=2)  Nursing home (n =1)  Mix (n=7)
 Flyers (n=3)  Cooperative extension (n =1) ITT
 Center-based (n=1)  Not reported (n =2)  Yes (n =2)
 Employer’s Worksite (n=1) Country  No (n=7)
Quasi-experimental without control (n =1)  Faith-based (n=1)  USA (n =7) Reported Costs
 Target Mailings (n=2)  Canada (n =2)  Yes (n=1)
 Targeted Contact (n=3) Average Setting Sample Size  No (n =8)
 Other (n=1)  4.17 (±3.82)  Moderation Analyses
Pre-post design (n =1)  Not Reported (n=1) Average Setting Adoption Rate  (n=0)
Sample Selection  Not report (n =9)
   Convenience Sampling (n =2)
 Random Selection (n =0)
 Targeted (n =6)
 Convenience and Targeted (n =1)
 Random and Targeted (n =0)
 Not specified (n =0)
Physician Referral
 Yes (n =2)
 No (n =7)
No increase in physical activity (n=4) Randomized with control (n =3) Recruitment Strategies Program Location Physical Activity Outcome
 Word of Mouth (n=1)  Medical center (n =1)  Subjective (n =4)
 Flyers (n=3)  Worksite (n =1)  Objective (n =0)
Quasi-experimental with control (n =1)  Center-based (n=1)  Faith-based location (n=1)  Mix (n =0)
 Target Contact (n=1)  Not reported (n=1) ITT
Sample Selection Country  Yes (n =1)
 Convenience Sampling (n =0)  USA (n =3)  No (n =3)
 Random Selection (n =0)  Australia (n =1) Reported Costs
Quasi-experimental without control (n =0)  Targeted (n =3) Average Setting Sample Size  Yes (n =1)
 Convenience and Targeted (n=1)  102.67 (±173.50)  No (n =3)
 Random and Targeted (n =0) Average Setting Adoption Rate Timing of Post-Program Assessment
 Not specified (n =0)  50.50 %  33.00 weeks (±26.20)
Physician Referral  Not report (n =3)  Moderation Analyses
Pre-post design (n =0)  Yes (n =1)    (n=0)
 No (n =3)