Examining the state, quality and strength of the evidence in the research on built environments and physical activity among adults: An overview of reviews from high income countries

Ref ID 902
First Author S.A. Prince
Journal HEALTH & PLACE
Year Of Publishing 2022
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353829222001356?via%3Dihub
Keywords Protocols
Risk of bias
Disclosure
Public health
Low methodological quality
Single reviewer
Environment
Problem(s) No registered or published protocol
Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
Single reviewer / lack of double checking
Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol
Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
Number of systematic reviews included 116
Summary of Findings From 116 included systematic reviews of associations between built environments and physical activity domains of active living indexed across 6 databases from January 2000 to May 2020. Most (75/116) reviews were assessed as being of critically low methodological quality, 18 were assessed as low quality using AMSTAR-2 criteria. Items which were not reported by a high proportion of systematic reviews were the availability or deviations from a pre-registered protocol; and reporting on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review. Other items which many reviews did not adhere to were performing study selection in duplicate, performing data extraction in duplicate, and accounting for Risk of Bias in individual studies when interpreting/ discussing the results of the review.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes