effectiveness of interventions. ongoing face-to-face support; telephone support; written The review’s conclusions education/motivation material; self differed to earlier reviews which monitoring. The intervention was concluded that interventions delivered by one or a number of that encouraged home-based practitioners with various activity were more effective professional backgrounds including than facility-based activity physicians, nurses, health interventions. This review used educators, counsellors, exercise more rigid inclusion criteria (eg leaders and peers. Only one study outcome measures with at least adopted a structured and 6 months follow-up) and supervised approach to their subsequently excluded some intervention, encouraging studies included in these participants to cycle on a static previous reviews. They also bike for 10 to 25 minutes at a used unpublished data from intensity, as part of a study authors and performed a 2-hour exercise session. The quantitative analysis using majority of studies adopted an standardised mean differences unstructured and independently for effects as opposed to just performed physical activity descriptions alone. The regime. We found the majority of conclusions are similar to studies contacted participants on another published review (). at least three or more occasions in the first 4 weeks of the The findings of this review are intervention to support and in contrast to the conclusions of encourage any adoption of a review produced by the physical activity. Studies offered a Center for Disease Control () range of support and follow up to which examined the participants between week 5 and effectiveness of final outcome measure (a behavioural interventions minimum of 6 months post for the promotion of physical baseline intervention). The types activity and concluded that of follow-up offered to participants there was "good" evidence to at any point ranged from postal
effectiveness of interventions. The review’s conclusions differed to earlier reviews which concluded that interventions that encouraged home-based activity were more effective than facility-based activity interventions. This review used more rigid inclusion criteria (eg outcome measures with at least 6 months follow-up) and subsequently excluded some studies included in these previous reviews. They also used unpublished data from study authors and performed a quantitative analysis using standardised mean differences for effects as opposed to just descriptions alone. The conclusions are similar to another published review (). The findings of this review are in contrast to the conclusions of a review produced by the Center for Disease Control () which examined the effectiveness of behavioural interventions for the promotion of physical activity and concluded that there was "good" evidence to ongoing face-to-face support; telephone support; written education/motivation material; self monitoring. The intervention was delivered by one or a number of practitioners with various professional backgrounds including physicians, nurses, health educators, counsellors, exercise leaders and peers. Only one study adopted a structured and supervised approach to their intervention, encouraging participants to cycle on a static bike for 10 to 25 minutes at a intensity, as part of a 2-hour exercise session. The majority of studies adopted an unstructured and independently performed physical activity regime. We found the majority of studies contacted participants on at least three or more occasions in the first 4 weeks of the intervention to support and encourage any adoption of physical activity. Studies offered a range of support and follow up to participants between week 5 and final outcome measure (a minimum of 6 months post baseline intervention). The types of follow-up offered to participants at any point ranged from postal
Physical%20activity%20Evidence%20Review%20Final.docx