OBJECTIVE: Low socioeconomic status (SES) is a risk factor for type 2 diabetes and changes in diet and physical activity can prevent diabetes. We assessed the effectiveness and acceptability of community-based dietary and physical activity interventions among low-SES groups in the UK. METHOD: We searched relevant databases and web resources from 1990 to November 2009 to identify relevant published and grey literature using an iterative approach, focusing on UK studies. RESULTS: Thirty-five relevant papers (nine quantitative, 23 qualitative and three mixed methods studies) were data extracted, quality assessed and synthesised using narrative synthesis and thematic analysis. The relationship between interventions and barriers and facilitators was also examined. Dietary/nutritional, food retail, physical activity and multi-component interventions demonstrated mixed effectiveness. Qualitative studies indicated a range of barriers and facilitators, which spanned pragmatic, social and psychological issues. The more effective interventions used a range of techniques to address some surface-level psychological and pragmatic concerns, however many deeper-level social, psychological and pragmatic concerns were not addressed. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the effectiveness of community-based dietary and physical activity interventions is inconclusive. A range of barriers and facilitators exist, some of which were addressed by interventions but some of which require consideration in future research.
OBJECTIVE: Low socioeconomic status (SES) is a risk factor for type 2 diabetes and changes in diet and physical activity can prevent diabetes. We assessed the effectiveness and acceptability of community-based dietary and physical activity interventions among low-SES groups in the UK. METHOD: We searched relevant databases and web resources from 1990 to November 2009 to identify relevant published and grey literature using an iterative approach, focusing on UK studies. RESULTS: Thirty-five relevant papers (nine quantitative, 23 qualitative and three mixed methods studies) were data extracted, quality assessed and synthesised using narrative synthesis and thematic analysis. The relationship between interventions and barriers and facilitators was also examined. Dietary/nutritional, food retail, physical activity and multi-component interventions demonstrated mixed effectiveness. Qualitative studies indicated a range of barriers and facilitators, which spanned pragmatic, social and psychological issues. The more effective interventions used a range of techniques to address some surface-level psychological and pragmatic concerns, however many deeper-level social, psychological and pragmatic concerns were not addressed. CONCLUSION: Evidence on the effectiveness of community-based dietary and physical activity interventions is inconclusive. A range of barriers and facilitators exist, some of which were addressed by interventions but some of which require consideration in future research.
Authors: Ensela Mema; Everett S Spain; Corby K Martin; James O Hill; R Drew Sayer; Howard D McInvale; Lee A Evans; Nicholas H Gist; Alexander D Borowsky; Diana M Thomas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-10-19 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Francisco Javier López-Román; Francisca I Tornel-Miñarro; Eloisa Delsors-Merida-Nicolich; Lourdes Fernández-López; María Teresa Martínez-Ros; Esther García Sánchez; Asensio López-Santiago Journal: Eur J Gen Pract Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 1.904
Authors: Marjolein C Harbers; Cédric N H Middel; Josine M Stuber; Joline W J Beulens; Femke Rutters; Yvonne T van der Schouw Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Claire L Cleland; Ruth F Hunter; Mark A Tully; David Scott; Frank Kee; Michael Donnelly; Lindsay Prior; Margaret E Cupples Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 6.457