Reasons for Non-Participation in Physical Activity Interventions
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Reasons for Non-Participation in Physical Activity Interventions: A Mixed Methods Study
IRAS ID
129308
Contact name
Sophie Attwood
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Cambridge
Research summary
Physical activity (PA) can delay or prevent chronic diseases such as vascular diseases, which include heart disease, stroke, diabetes and kidney disease. The majority of adults in the UK do not meet the Government’s PA recommendations of five or more sessions of 30 minutes duration moderate-intensity activity per week.
The NHS is currently conducting a program of ’Health Checks’ - a screening initiative that assesses the vascular disease risk of adults in the 40-74 year age bracket in England. These Health Checks offer an ideal opportunity to present attendees with a brief intervention aimed at promoting physical activity.
This sub-study follows on from an existing trial that is working to determine the potential efficacy, fidelty, feasiblity and acceptability of a brief PA intervention administered in the context of the Health Checks program (the ’Very Brief Interventions’ or VBI trial).
The sub-study aims specifically to determine the reasons that ’non-responders’ to the VBI trial give for turning down the offer to participate, and to establish their views on taking part in physical activity trials, interventions and on physical activity more generally.
These aims will be addressed through in-depth interviews probing the role of individual characteristics, psychological, social and environmental factors in determining decisions not to take part. Non-responders’ views and preferences on what would constitute an appropriate and engaging PA intervention will also be elicited.
A ‘profiling’ study will be conducted alongside these interviews. This study will involve analysis of non-responders’ demographic data (age, gender, ethicity, SES) obtained from GP practice registries. The aim of this work is to construct a non-responder ’profile’ that will help to identify those individuals who may require more intensive recruitment efforts.
REC name
London - Harrow Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
13/LO/1163
Date of REC Opinion
9 Sep 2013
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion