Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content
Fig. 5 | International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Fig. 5

From: Are physical activity referral scheme components associated with increased physical activity, scheme uptake, and adherence rate? A meta-analysis and meta-regression

Fig. 5

Forest plots indicating PARS effect on physical activity as compared to usual care, PA advice, and scheme intensity determined by random effects meta-analysis. Hedges’ g > 0 favors PARS, PARS physical activity referral scheme, CI confidence intervals, Meta-analysis A Omitting Murphy et al. 2012 as influential case for the PA analysis: g = 0.22, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.29, p-value < 0.0001, I2 = 0% [0.0%; 62.4%], Meta-analysis B Bellanger et al. 2023 included also active participants at baseline

Back to article page

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

Contact us