Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review

Abstract Background Outdoor walking groups are widely-used programmes aimed at improving physical activity and health outcomes. Despite being promoted as accessible and inclusive, emerging work highlights participation biases based on gender, age and socioeconomic status, for example. To explicate t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Benjamin P. Rigby, Caroline J. Dodd-Reynolds, Emily J. Oliver
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-03-01
Series:Public Health Reviews
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40985-020-00119-4
id doaj-573e7679fbf34ce3b77b7502b43edf7c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-573e7679fbf34ce3b77b7502b43edf7c2021-04-02T12:50:23ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Public Health Reviews2107-69522020-03-0141112410.1186/s40985-020-00119-4Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping reviewBenjamin P. Rigby0Caroline J. Dodd-Reynolds1Emily J. Oliver2Department of Sociology, Durham UniversityWolfson Research Institute, Durham University Queen’s CampusWolfson Research Institute, Durham University Queen’s CampusAbstract Background Outdoor walking groups are widely-used programmes aimed at improving physical activity and health outcomes. Despite being promoted as accessible and inclusive, emerging work highlights participation biases based on gender, age and socioeconomic status, for example. To explicate the impact of outdoor walking groups on physical activity inequities, we conducted a scoping review of published outdoor walking group literatures. Specifically, we critically examined: (a) equity integration strategies; (b) intervention reach; (c) effectiveness; and (d) potential social determinants of engagement relating to the World Health Organization’s conceptual framework. Methods Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review protocol was used to develop a comprehensive search strategy and identify relevant academic and grey literatures, which were screened using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were organised by Cochrane PROGRESS-Plus equity characteristics and a narrative summary was presented for each thematic area. Findings Sixty-two publications were included. Key findings were: (a) some evidence of targeted intervention trials. Large-scale national programmes were tailored to regional activity and health needs, which may contribute toward addressing inequities. However, participant demographics seldom informed reported analyses; (b) participation was more likely among white, more socioeconomically advantaged, middle-to-older aged, female and able-bodied adults; (c) positive physical and psychological outcomes were unlikely to extend along social gradients; and (d) interventions primarily addressed intermediary determinants (e.g. psychosocial barriers; material resource). Social capital (e.g. friend-making) was identified as potentially important for addressing physical activity inequalities. Conclusions The published literature on outdoor walking groups leaves unanswered questions regarding participation inequalities, with implications for future physical activity promotion. Currently, participation in outdoor walking groups is typically more prevalent among advantaged subpopulations. We make recommendations for research and practice to address these issues, as well as aid the translation of existing knowledge into practice. We advocate increased focus on the social determinants of engagement. A more consistent approach to collecting and analysing participant socio-demographic data is required. Our findings also support recommendations that appropriate tailoring of universal programmes to community needs and embedding strategies to increase social cohesion are important in developing equitable programmes.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40985-020-00119-4WalkingPhysical activityInequalitiesSocial determinantsScoping reviewEquity
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Benjamin P. Rigby
Caroline J. Dodd-Reynolds
Emily J. Oliver
spellingShingle Benjamin P. Rigby
Caroline J. Dodd-Reynolds
Emily J. Oliver
Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
Public Health Reviews
Walking
Physical activity
Inequalities
Social determinants
Scoping review
Equity
author_facet Benjamin P. Rigby
Caroline J. Dodd-Reynolds
Emily J. Oliver
author_sort Benjamin P. Rigby
title Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
title_short Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
title_full Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
title_fullStr Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
title_sort inequities and inequalities in outdoor walking groups: a scoping review
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Public Health Reviews
issn 2107-6952
publishDate 2020-03-01
description Abstract Background Outdoor walking groups are widely-used programmes aimed at improving physical activity and health outcomes. Despite being promoted as accessible and inclusive, emerging work highlights participation biases based on gender, age and socioeconomic status, for example. To explicate the impact of outdoor walking groups on physical activity inequities, we conducted a scoping review of published outdoor walking group literatures. Specifically, we critically examined: (a) equity integration strategies; (b) intervention reach; (c) effectiveness; and (d) potential social determinants of engagement relating to the World Health Organization’s conceptual framework. Methods Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review protocol was used to develop a comprehensive search strategy and identify relevant academic and grey literatures, which were screened using pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were organised by Cochrane PROGRESS-Plus equity characteristics and a narrative summary was presented for each thematic area. Findings Sixty-two publications were included. Key findings were: (a) some evidence of targeted intervention trials. Large-scale national programmes were tailored to regional activity and health needs, which may contribute toward addressing inequities. However, participant demographics seldom informed reported analyses; (b) participation was more likely among white, more socioeconomically advantaged, middle-to-older aged, female and able-bodied adults; (c) positive physical and psychological outcomes were unlikely to extend along social gradients; and (d) interventions primarily addressed intermediary determinants (e.g. psychosocial barriers; material resource). Social capital (e.g. friend-making) was identified as potentially important for addressing physical activity inequalities. Conclusions The published literature on outdoor walking groups leaves unanswered questions regarding participation inequalities, with implications for future physical activity promotion. Currently, participation in outdoor walking groups is typically more prevalent among advantaged subpopulations. We make recommendations for research and practice to address these issues, as well as aid the translation of existing knowledge into practice. We advocate increased focus on the social determinants of engagement. A more consistent approach to collecting and analysing participant socio-demographic data is required. Our findings also support recommendations that appropriate tailoring of universal programmes to community needs and embedding strategies to increase social cohesion are important in developing equitable programmes.
topic Walking
Physical activity
Inequalities
Social determinants
Scoping review
Equity
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40985-020-00119-4
work_keys_str_mv AT benjaminprigby inequitiesandinequalitiesinoutdoorwalkinggroupsascopingreview
AT carolinejdoddreynolds inequitiesandinequalitiesinoutdoorwalkinggroupsascopingreview
AT emilyjoliver inequitiesandinequalitiesinoutdoorwalkinggroupsascopingreview
_version_ 1721567413630140416