1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Guest Perceptions of Physical Activity Point-of-Decision Prompts at a Conservatory with Botanical Gardens

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Point-of-decision prompts are cost-effective strategies to promote physical activity in public spaces. This study explored how adult and child guests of a conservatory with botanical gardens perceived point-of-decision prompts that aimed to promote physical activity. Seven point-of-decision prompts were developed and displayed throughout the conservatory. Adult guests ( n = 140) were invited to complete a voluntary and anonymous survey to assess awareness of point-of-decision prompts, adult–child interactions, and physical activity engagement. Descriptive statistics were calculated using SPSS version 23. Sixty-one percent of guests ( n = 86) who responded to the survey noticed the point-of-decision prompts. Over 65% ( n = 56) of those guests completed at least one of the physical activities, and 53% ( n = 46) completed one to three. Of guests attending with (a) child(ren) ( n = 17) who completed the survey, over half ( n = 9) engaged in at least one physical activity together. In sum, the point-of-decision prompts were noticed by some guests in this public space. More research is needed to determine whether point-of-decision prompts are able to lead to sustainable behavior change.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Economic analysis of physical activity interventions.

          Numerous interventions have been shown to increase physical activity but have not been ranked by effectiveness or cost. This study provides a systematic review of physical activity interventions and calculates their cost-effectiveness ratios. A systematic literature review was conducted (5579 articles) and 91 effective interventions promoting physical activity were identified, with enough information to translate effects into MET-hours gained. Cost-effectiveness ratios were then calculated as cost per MET-hour gained per day per individual reached. Physical activity benefits were compared to U.S. guideline-recommended levels (1.5 MET-hours per day for adults and 3.0 MET-hours per day for children, equivalent to walking 30 and 60 minutes, respectively). The most cost-effective strategies were for point-of-decision prompts (e.g., signs to prompt stair use), with a median cost of $0.07/MET-hour/day/person; these strategies had tiny effects, adding only 0.2% of minimum recommended physical activity levels. School-based physical activity interventions targeting children and adolescents ranked well with a median of $0.42/MET-hour/day/person, generating an average of 16% of recommended physical activity. Although there were few interventions in the categories of "creation or enhanced access to places for physical activity" and "community campaigns," several were cost effective. The least cost-effective categories were the high-intensity "individually adapted behavior change" and "social support" programs, with median cost-effectiveness ratios of $0.84 and $1.16 per MET-hour/day/person. However, they also had the largest effect sizes, adding 35%-43% of recommended physical activity, respectively. Study quality was variable, with many relying on self-reported outcomes. The cost effectiveness, effect size, and study quality should all be considered when choosing physical activity interventions. Copyright © 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Point-of-decision prompts to increase stair use. A systematic review update.

            In 2000, the Guide to Community Preventive Services (Community Guide) completed a systematic review of the effectiveness of various approaches to increasing physical activity including informational, behavioral and social, and environmental and policy approaches. Among these approaches was the use of signs placed by elevators and escalators to encourage stair use. This approach was found to be effective based on sufficient evidence. Over the past 5 years the body of evidence of this intervention has increased substantially, warranting an updated review. This update was conducted on 16 peer-reviewed studies (including the six studies in the previous systematic review), which met specified quality criteria and included evaluation outcomes of interest. These studies evaluated two interventions: point-of-decision prompts to increase stair use and enhancements to stairs or stairwells (e.g., painting walls, laying carpet, adding artwork, playing music) when combined with point-of-decision prompts to increase stair use. This latter intervention was not included in the original systematic review. According to the Community Guide rules of evidence, there is strong evidence that point-of-decision prompts are effective in increasing the use of stairs. There is insufficient evidence, due to an inadequate number of studies, to determine whether or not enhancements to stairs or stairwells are an effective addition to point-of-decision prompts. This article describes the rationale for these systematic reviews, along with information about the review process and the resulting conclusions. Additional information about applicability, other effects, and barriers to implementation is also provided. Published by Elsevier Inc.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Promoting Parent and Child Physical Activity Together: Elicitation of Potential Intervention Targets and Preferences

              Promoting physical activities that involve both parents and their children would be very useful to the improved health and well-being of families, yet coactivity interventions have been particularly unsuccessful in past research. The purpose of this study was to elicit the salient parental beliefs about coactivity framed through theory of planned behavior in order to inform future intervention content. A representative sample of Canadian parents ( N = 483) with children aged 6 to 14 years completed belief elicitation measures of theory of planned behavior, as well as coactivity and program preferences. Analyses included content theming by physical activity belief and preference through tallies of the percentages of parents endorsing each belief. Exploratory analyses of differences in endorsed themes were conducted by parent (mother, father), age of child (6-10 years, 11-14 years), and sex of the child. The results showed that behavioral beliefs about health, interpersonal and educational/learning opportunities and control beliefs about lack of time, various incompatible parent/child factors, parental health, and bad weather were dominant themes. Most of these themes did not vary in endorsement by parent and child characteristics. By contrast, preferences for various activities varied by parent and child characteristics, yet parents overwhelmingly desired the activities to be outdoors, close to home, after work, and originally delivered from community health professionals via Internet or face-to face means. Overall, the findings provide several considerations for specific targets to improve future physical activity intervention approaches among parents and their children.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                12 June 2019
                June 2019
                : 16
                : 12
                : 2074
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Physical Therapy, MGH Institute of Health Professions, Boston, MA 02129, USA; cnatale9@ 123456gmail.com
                [2 ]Department of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA; mkp984@ 123456g.harvard.edu
                [3 ]Minnesota Zoological Gardens, Apple Valley, MN 55124, USA; emily.kalnicky@ 123456state.mn.us
                [4 ]Department of Health and Physical Activity, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: seross@ 123456pitt.edu ; Tel.: +1-412-383-4042
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3466-8650
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4354-3377
                Article
                ijerph-16-02074
                10.3390/ijerph16122074
                6616916
                31212788
                52f72b97-7d9b-4620-8e62-bff156186aa7
                © 2019 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 05 April 2019
                : 10 June 2019
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                physical activity promotion,botanical garden,children,adult,public health
                Public health
                physical activity promotion, botanical garden, children, adult, public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article