Skip to main content

Table 3 Characteristics of participants

From: Recruiting participants to walking intervention studies: a systematic review

Study Number, Author and Pub. Year

Mean age, SD or Range

Gender (%Female)

Ethnicity

SES/Income

Education

Quality Metric Score

l. Watson et al, 2005

29.4

100

NS (20% Not Australian born)

96% married, 80% Australian born. Competent at filling in a questionnaire in English

39.2% third level education

5

2. Banks-Wallace et al, 2004

18+

100

African American

NS

NS

4

3. Kolt et al, 2006

74 (SD 6)

66

NS

Urban, Patients from three GP lists. Phone lines at home.

NS

4

4. Nguyen et al, 2002

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

4

5. Prestwich et al, 2010

23.44

64

NS

Students

Undergraduate

4

6. Rowland et al, 2004

74 (SD 6.2)

69

White (Non-Hispanic) 89%

Income > 35 K US 26%, Married, 57.5%.

Edu. > High school diploma 45%

4

7. Sherman et al, 2006

42.5 (Range 22-64)

100

Caucasian

Rural, 42% Medicare, 43% private insurance, 15% self pay or unknown insurance details, mean BMI 30.6 (78% overweight or obese), 90% with one or more risk factors for CV disease,

NS

4

8. Wilbur et al, 2006

48.6 (Range 40-65)

100

African American

Urban, 60% unmarried, 88% mothers (2.1 children ave.), 70% full time employed, 61% earning > $30 K annually, 57% reporting no 'hardhsips'.

87% some or full third level education

4

9. Baker et al, 2008b

49 (SD 9)

78

NS

NS

NS

3

10. Brownson et al 2005

18+

79.7

95% white

31.3% 35 K+ pa

45% some or full third level Edu.

3

11. Cox et al, 2008

55 (Range 50-70)

100

NS

Urban, English Speakers, married (76%), employed (56.5%), children (2.83). Non-smokers.

Educated (13 years ave.)

3

12. Dinger et al, 2007

41.5 years (Range 25-54 years)

100

86% White

Urban, BMI > 30 (57%), access to email

68% 3rd Level Edu.

3

13. Dubbert et al, 2002

68.7 yrs (60-80 range)

1 (99% Male)

28% Non-white

56.4% rural, 79.6% married/cohabiting, 12.7% tobacco users, 8.8% in financial hardship, 7.4 hrs per week employment, 20% used alcohol, 3.8 co-morbid medical conditions.

51.9% high school or more

3

14. Dubbert et al, 2008

Mean 72 (Range 60 to 85 years)

0 (100% Male)

14% African-American, 86% White

Urban

Majority high school Educated

3

15. Gilson et al, 2008

41.4 (SD 10.4)

91%

NS

All employees at a University

NS

3

16. Jancey et al, 2008

69 (65-74)

67

NS

67% Australian born, Urban ('Metropolitan Perth'), 66% had a partner

NS

3

17. Lamb et al, 2002

50.8 (Range 40-70)

52

NS

NS

NS

3

18. Lee et al, 1997

36.5 (Range 23-54)

100

Latino, African-American, Asian, Pacific Islanders, other (ns)

"Middle class, well educated, English speaking"

"Well educated"

3

19. Matthews et al, 2007

53

100

84% White. 16% African-American/Other

NS

NS

3

20. Merom et al, 2007

49.1 (Range 30-65)

85

NS

Rural and Urban, 74% married, 92.9 English speakers (primarily), 57.7 employed, 72.2% BMI > 25, 90% non-smokers, 81% self rated health good or more.

45.5% university degree

3

21. Ornes and Ransdell, 2007

20 (SD 2.6)

100

"Mostly Caucasian volunteers"

Students

Undergraduate

3

22. Richardson et al, 2007

52 (SD 10.5)

65

76% white, 13% black, 10% other

64% high income > $70,000

NS

3

23. Rosenberg et al, 2009

83 (Range 74-92)

50%

NS

NS

NS

3

24. Whitt-Glover et al, 2008

52 (Range 20-83)

89

Black Americans

Urban, average BMI 34.7, married (49%), 85% had at least one chronic health condition.

96% high school education or higher

3

25. Arbour & Ginis, 2009

48.7 (SD 9.61)

100

90% White

90% Employed

86% Some or full 3rd Level edu.

2

26. Culos-Reed et al, 2008

66 (Range 46-83)

81

96% White

76% retired, 70% higher education, urban

NS

2

27. Currie and Develin, 2001

NS

100

NS

NS

NS

2

28. Darker et al, 2010

40.6 (Range 16-65)

71

NS

NS

NS

2

29. De Cocker et al 2007

48.7 (Range 25-75)

52.8

NS

Urban, 68.1% employed, 63.7% reporting good or better than good health

60% with third level degrees

2

30. Dinger et al, 2005

41.7 (SD 6.8) (Range 25-54)

100

89% White

Employees or spouses of university employees, Overweight or obese (77.7%), not FT students, not pregnant

University degree (69%)

2

31. Engel and Lindner, 2006

62

46

NS

NS

NS

2

32. Foreman et al, 2001

NS

Male and Female

NS

NS

NS

2

33. Humpel et al, 2004

60 (SD 11)

57%

NS

NS

46.9% < 12 yrs edu., 32.1% had a trade edu., 21% Uni.

2

34. Nies et al, 2006

45 (Range 35-60)

100

European-American and African-American

41% > 50 K (US) household income, 49% married, 33% southern American

74% college edu. or higher

2

35. Purath et al, 2004

43.9

100

81.5% White

100% employed at a university (62% in admin/professional), 92% non-smokers, BMI 30.5, 68% married

14.25 years edu. (mean)

2

36. Shaw et al, 2007

40

99

NS

Employed in an urban workplace

NS

2

37. Sidman et al, 2004

43.2

100

NS

NS

NS

2

38. Thomas and Williams, 2006

18-50+

75.5

NS

Employed, Both Urban and Rural locations. 'wide variety of professions, ages, incomes, education standards and levels of health and fitness not considered, disadvantaged in terms of the social determinants of health' 'almost all could be described as sedentary'

NS

2

39. Tudor-Locke et al, 2002

53 (SD 6)

66

NS

NS

NS

2

40. Baker et al, 2008a

40 (SD 8.6)

86

NS

NS

NS

1

41. Hultquist et al, 2005

45 (SD 6 yrs)

100

3 non-white among completers

NS

NS

1

42. Lomabrd et al, 1995

40 (SD 9)

98

NS

University staff

NS

1

43. DNSWH, 2002

(Range 25-65)

NS

NS

Suburban

NS

1

44. Rovniak, 2005

Men (Range 20-44) Women (Range 20-54)

93.5

NS

Urban, at least access to email, sedentary, no more than one health risk factor, BMI < 39.9, no metabolic, pulmonary or CV disease, no bone joint or foot problems, not pregnant.

NS

1

45. Rowley et al, 2007

Children 0-4

Adults not reported

100 (Adults) Children not reported

'There were no children or babies from ethnic minority groups'.

Affluent'

NS

1

46. Talbot et al, 2003

69 (SD 6)

76

17% Non-White

60% > $30 K pa

NS

1

47. Wyatt et al, 2004

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

1