Literature DB >> 23729481

Using threshold messages to promote physical activity: implications for public perceptions of health effects.

Emily C L Knox1, Oliver J Webb, Dale W Esliger, Stuart J H Biddle, Lauren B Sherar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The promotion of physical activity (PA) guidelines to the general public is an important issue that lacks empirical investigation. PA campaigns often feature participation thresholds that cite PA guidelines verbatim [e.g., 150 min/week moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA)]. Some campaigns instead prefer to use generic PA messages (e.g., do as much MVPA as possible). 'Thresholds' may disrupt understanding of the health benefits of modest PA participation. This study examined the perception of health benefits of PA after exposure to PA messages that did and did not contain a duration threshold.
METHODS: Brief structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of adults (n = 1100). Participants received a threshold message (150 min/week MVPA), a message that presented the threshold as a minimum; a generic message or no message. Participants rated perceived health effects of seven PA durations. One-way analyses of variance with post hoc tests for group differences were used to assess raw perception ratings for each duration of PA.
RESULTS: Recipients of all three messages held more positive perceptions of >150 min/week of MVPA relative to those not receiving any message. For MVPA durations <150 min/week, the generic PA message group perceived the greatest health benefits. Those receiving the threshold message tended to have the least positive perceptions of durations <150 min/week.
CONCLUSION: Threshold messages were associated with lower perceived health benefits for modest PA durations. Campaigns based on threshold messages may be limited when promoting small PA increases at a population level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23729481     DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckt060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Public Health        ISSN: 1101-1262            Impact factor:   3.367


  6 in total

1.  Iron Beats Electricity: Resistance Training but Not Whole-Body Electromyostimulation Improves Cardiometabolic Health in Obese Metabolic Syndrome Patients during Caloric Restriction-A Randomized-Controlled Study.

Authors:  Dejan Reljic; Hans J Herrmann; Markus F Neurath; Yurdagül Zopf
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 5.717

2.  Time to 're-think' physical activity promotion for young people? Results from a repeated cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Paul Best; Mark A Tully; Rekesh Corepal; Frank Kee; Ruth F Hunter
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 3.295

3.  Health Benefits of Physical Activity: A Strengths-Based Approach.

Authors:  Darren E R Warburton; Shannon S D Bredin
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  Effects of very low volume high intensity versus moderate intensity interval training in obese metabolic syndrome patients: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Dejan Reljic; Fabienne Frenk; Hans J Herrmann; Markus F Neurath; Yurdagül Zopf
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Messages to promote physical activity: Are descriptors of required duration and intensity related to intentions to be more active?

Authors:  Emily C L Knox; Stuart J H Biddle; Ian M Taylor; Amy E Latimer-Cheung; Oliver J Webb; Lauren B Sherar
Journal:  J Educ Health Promot       Date:  2015-12-30

Review 6.  Get the message? A scoping review of physical activity messaging.

Authors:  Chloë Williamson; Graham Baker; Nanette Mutrie; Ailsa Niven; Paul Kelly
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 6.457

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.