Electronic Supplementary Appendix S3. Summary of study characteristics

First author(year)

Participant characteristics

Study length Predictor(s) measured Physical activity measure

Statistical results and effect sizes

Time varying covariation

QR (/15)

Armitage (2005) [47]

N=94 members from private gym

Mean age: 37.6

Males: 41Females: 53

3 months TPB1) Intention 2) Subjective norm 3) Self-efficacy/PBC

Self-report and objective measure (number of times gym card swiped)

- classified as "did not attend this week" and "did attend this week"

Intention - NS SN – NSPBC/SE – Significant β-.49

No 9

Beenackers (2012) [86]

N = 1289 Mean age: 40.7

Males: 37.8%Females: 62.2%

Western Australia Residential Environment Project (RESIDE)

2 years Self-report and objective measures of built environment GIS used to assess: 1) Residential density 2) Street connectivity 3) land-use mix 4) Transport destination 5) Recreation destinations Self-report variables: 6) Access to mixed services 7) Neighbourhood aesthetics 9) Traffic hazards 10) Crime hazards 11) Hilly streets 12) Major barriers present 13) Local parking difficult 14) Access to park 15)Access to cycling paths 16) Traffic speed usually slow 17) Traffic-slowing devices 18) Pedestrian crossings present 19) Streets are well lit at night

Self-report Cycling

Neighbourhood Physical Activity questionnaire

Dichotomous variable yes/no to cycle in a usual week

Connectivity – NSAccessibility – Small ES OR=1.54Residential density – Small ES OR = 1.52Number of recreation destinations NE

Aesthetics – NS

(Safety) Crime hazards – NSWell-lite streets - NS

Social influence - NE

Intention - NE

Self-efficacy - NS

Yes 12

20) Few cul-de-sacs 21) Intersection distance short 21) Many four way intersections 22) Many alternative routes 23) Number of transport destinations 23) Number of recreation destinations 24) Intrapersonal factors - attitude 25) Self-efficacy 26) Interpersonal factors -social influence 27) Intention

Bell (2005)[36];

Brown (2003)[106];

Brown (2009)[50]

N = 7281 – 15,935Ages 18-78 yrsFemales only

Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health

4 years; 2 surveys

Life Domains: 1)Employment status 2)Relationship status (marriage/cohabitation) 3) Motherhood status

4) Divorce

5)Age6) Income7) Ethnicity (not speaking English at home)

Self-report/study created

Survey 1: Two adapted questions from Australian National Heart Foundation Risk Factor Prevalence Study

Survey 2: Questions from Active Australia campaign surveys Categorized as (1) Inactive (2) Active

Both then calculated a PA score based on a MET score

Change in PA was categorized as "consistently sedentary",

Employment – NS

Marriage predicted a decline in PA OR = 1.5;

Becoming a mother predicted a decline in PA OR = 1.6; Remain a mother compared to remain childless predicted decline in PA OR = 1.3Parenthood – birth of first child OR = 1.67Birth of second child OR = 1.52

Divorce: NS, NE

Age: NSIncome: NSEthnicity – n/a

Yes 11

12

13

"consistently low active", "consistently active", "decreasing", or "increasing"

Boon-Heinonen (2011)[79]

Kip (2002)[129]

M = 4532 - 5115 Ages - 18-30 years

Males – 55% Female – 45% CARDIA study

United States

15 years

4 assessments

Socioeconomic status 1) Marriage2)Education3) Income4) Parenthood

5) Change in family history of health (heart attack or stroke)

Self-report

13 categories of moderate and vigorousrecreational sports, exercise, leisure, and occupational activities

Marriage – Onset of marriage significant and meaningful for decline in PA

Education – Higher education level significant and meaningful for PA increase

Income – Significant and meaningful for decrease in income related to decrease in PA among African Americans

Parenthood – Significant and meaningful among females

Change in family history of health did not predict a change in PA

Yes 9

13

Borodulin (2012)[82]

N = 718 Mean age: 62.5

National Mini Finland health

22 years 1) Smoking 2)Occupational status 4) alcohol 5) Education

Self-reportRegular moderate to vigorous Leisure time physical activity

Smoking – NS

Employment – NS

Alcohol – NS

Yes 12

survey Education – NS

Boutelle (2004)[49]

N = 1146Mean age: 37.6 Females: 917 Males: 229

Community based sample out of the U.S. Pound of Prevention Study

4 years

Assessments taken annually (after controlled for intervention)

1) Gender 2) Age 3) BMI 4) Employment 5) Ethnicity 6) Income group 7) Marital status 8) Education 9) Smoking status 10) TV/day 11) Social support (family) 12) Social support (friend) 13) Exercise level at baseline

Self-report Vigorous activity 5 Questions from the Physical Activity History questionnaire (PAH)

Measure vigorous LTPA

Gender- NS

Age – NS

Employment – NS

Ethnicity adoption NS; maintenance sig h =.25 (compared to non-Caucasian)

Income – Maintenance h=.34; adoption NS

Marriage NS

Education - Maintenance h = .24Adoption NS

Smoking - Maintenance h = .20 Adoption h = .33

Social support - NS

No 12

Chung (2009)[77]

Margolis (2013)[73]

Shaw

N = 9935 - 16,606 Mean age: 60.3

Females: 53%; non-Hispanic whites: 74%

Health and Retirement Study (HRS) 1992 U.S.

6 year studyFollow-up every 2 years

1) Income 2) Divorce

3) Gender4) Ethnicity 5) Marital status

6) Education level 7) Age 8) Work status

Self-reportDichotomous self- report with vigorous physical activity definition

Income significant and small effect for decreased PA and lower income

Divorce - NS

Gender – NS

Ethnicity – NS

Marital status - NS

Education - NS

No 12

10

13

(2008) [57]

Age: NE

Employment - NS

Coogan (2009)[37]

N = 3206Ages 21-69 African American women

Black Women's Health Study New York, Los Angeles, Chicago U.S.

6 years Assessed biennially

Environment 1) Change in housing density

Self-report

Total hours walking per week and vigorous activity

7 response categories

Housing density NS Yes 9

Cornelio (2008)[60]

N = 1246 Males: 567 Females: 679 (4 different age groups) Data from Cornelia Health Interview Survey Follow-up Study Barcelona,

8 years 1994 baseline and follow up in 2002

1) Gender 2) Age 3) Education level 4)Social class (occupation) 5) Smoking 6) Alcohol consumption 7) Health-related chronic conditions 8) Self perceived health 9) BMI

Self-reportAdapted questionnaire from US Health Interview Survey and the Welsh Heart Health Study. Physical activity classified as sedentary, light-moderate, and

No effects found for any variables

No 13

Catalonia Spain. vigorous

MVPA

Courneya (2001) [87]

Plotnikoff (2001) [130]

Plotnikoff (2009) [131]

Rhodes (2006) [100]

N = 683 –1602

Mean age: 40.59 Females: 54%

Ottawa-Carleton, Canada

Assessments made at baseline, 6 months and 1 year

1) Intention 2) Perceived control 3) Attitude 4) Subjective norm 5) Social support

6) Cognitive and behavioral processes of change

Self-report single item question "Do you engage in regular vigorous physical activity for at least 20 minutes each week?" - Regular defined as 'at least 3 times'.

Intention was a significant and meaningful predictor for maintenance (.69); NS for adoption

Perceived behavioural control – NS

Attitude - NS at Time 1, but significant and meaningful at Time 2 for adoption of PA (.43)

Subjective norm – NS

Social support – Adoption – NS; Social support predicted lower chance of relapse in second six month follow-up (.36)

More positive attitude also predicted preparers to regular exercise at 6 months (.34); Intention, attitude and social support all predicted regression from action/maintenance stage.

No 11

13

14

12

Dawson (2007)[67]

N = 551Mean age: 64.4Females: 72.1%

Participants from England and

Longitudinal 12 month follow-up

Neighbourhood environment - Barriers to neighbourhood walking 1) Health problems 2) No one to walk with 3) Aesthetics

Self-reportBritish Heart Foundation's "Daily Activities Questionnaire" adapted from

No effects found for any variables.

No 11

Scotland Recruited from "Walking the Way to Health" and "Paths to Health"

4) No pavement 5) Nowhere to go nearby (connectivity, proximity) 8) Safety 9) Worry about being knocked over by cyclist 10) Worry about tripping over broken paving stones 11) Too much traffic 12) Too much pollution 13) Gender

validated American measure

De Moor (2006)[84]

N = 19,288

Mean age: 33.0 Males: 8773Females: 10.515

Netherlands

11 years 1) Personality (neuroticism) Self-report

Study designed question

Calculated as “exerciser” or “non-exerciser”

Exercisers scored higher on Extraversion (d=.32) and lower on neuroticism (d=0.14)

No 8

Dishman (2010) [91]

N=497 Mean age: 47Males: 36.6%

Hawaii

Two yearsAssessment every 6 months

1) Processes of change (combined – doesn’t work for analysis)2) Pros and cons (attitude/outcome expectancy) 3) Self-efficacy 4) Social support

Self-reportMVPA IPAQ

NS for adoption of PA for social support

NS for adoption of PA for self-efficacy

NS for attitude/outcome expectancy

Yes 14

Droomers (2001)[78]

Slingerland (2007)[132]

N =971 – 3793

Cohort 1 ages < 45 yearsCohort 2 ages > 45 years

GLOBE Study Netherlands

Prospective study over 6 years 1991 - 1997

Self-report 1) Health status (at least one problem) 2) Emotional problems 3) Energy levels 4) Isolation 5) Mobility 6) Pain 7) Sleep 8) Self-perceived health 9) Obesity 10) Alcohol consumption 11) Smoking 12) Work responsibilities 13) Family responsibilities/parenthood 14) Locus of control 15) Neuroticism 16) Life events

Self-report Divided into 4 categories: 1) Completely sedentary 2) Lightly active 3) Moderately active 4) Highly active

Income – Meaningful for decrease in PA OR= 2.91 Small - Medium ES

Education – Higher education predicted increase in PA OR = 2.41

Employment – NS

Smoking – NS for maintenance for adults under 45 years, but meaningful for PA relapse over 45 years OR=1.56 Small

Alcohol – NS

Personality (neuroticism) – Meaningful for drop out

No 13

12

17) Long lasting difficulties with health 18) Difficulties with relationships 19) Income 20) Financial problems 21) Situational difficulties 2) Neighbourhood circumstances 23) Housing problems 24) Education 25) Income

1) Employment status

of PA for middle aged adults (OR=1.87) but NS for older middle aged adults

Parenthood – Meaningful effect for parents less likely to maintain PA compared to non-parents (OR=1.87)

Safety – NS for overall PA; Extreme neighbourhood safety circumstances associated with meaningful effects of lower PA for people over 45 years

Aesthetics – Meaningful effects for extreme neighbourhood circumstances compared to ideal neighbourhood situations associated with lower levels of PA (OR = 2.04)

Dunton (2008)[92]

N= 246 (332 was total sample, only 246 for analysis of change)Ages: 35 – 65 Males: 129Females: 200

Southern California and Minnesota

3 months Self-report 1) Anticipated effective consequence of PA behavior success and failure (affective judgement)

Self-report short version of IPAQ

Affective judgement predicted an increase in PA adoption among sedentary individuals OR = 1.83

11

Eaton (1993) [62]

N = 1081 Mean age: 42.2 Two New England Communities 1986-1991

4 years Self-report Exercise Performance: 1) Previous success with exercise 2) Previous success with weight loss 3) Participation in any programs 4) participation in exercise program Health Knowledge and beliefs: 5) Participation in weight reduction program 6) Health belief that exercise reduces CHD 7) Suggest exercise to others 8) Perceived high risk for CHD Social Support: 9) Children recommend exercise 10) Organization membership CHD Risk Factors: 11) Present cigarette smoking 12) Diabetes mellitus 13) Hypertension 14) HDL> 35mg 15) BMI (>120%) 16) Cholesterol 17) Work outside home 18) Married 19) Education more than 12 years 20) age

Self-reportMVPA

One item from Paffenbarger Physical Activity Questionnaire

Social support – Adopters h = .18; maintainers women -.58; men – 1.74

Attitude/outcome expectancy and PA adoption Small ES

Sex NS

Age – Sig for adoption among men; NS for maintenance

Marriage – NS for adoption or maintenance

Education significant and meaningful ES - .24 for adopters; .15 maintenance

Smoking NS

No 12

Eng (2005)[34]

N = 38,865 Males only Ages: 40-75

Health Professionals Follow up study (U.S.)

Longitudinal repeated measures collected at 4 year intervals

Self-report 1)Marital status (divorce)

Self-report on activities converted into METs

Divorce NS Yes 11

Evenson (2002)[74]

Ranchod (2013)[64]

N = 6812 – 7782Ages 45-64

Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities

United States

2-6 year follow up

1) Ethnicity

2) Education3) Built environment (accessibility/connectivity)4) Income5) Age

Self-reportBaecke Questionnaire

Activities converted into METS semi-quantitative questionnaire adapted from the Cross-Cultural Activity Participation Study

Ethnicity NS

Education NS

Accessibility/convenience NS

Income NS

Age – NS

No 10

13

Fortier (2008)[38]

N = 149 females Ottawa, Canada Mean age = 51.8 years

Longitudinal baseline and 6 month follow-up

1) Intentions 2) Autonomous motivation 3) Controlled motivation 4) Subjective norms 5) Perceived behavioural control 6) Attitudes

Self-reportCommunity Health Activities Model Program for Seniors

Intention predicted PA change ES=.23

SN – NS

SE/PBC – NS

Attitude - NS

No 9

French (1996)[83]

Schmitz (1997)[56]

M = 3,672 Males = 1,692 Females = 1,980

Drawn from the Healthy Worker Project

Longitudinal Surveyed at baseline and 2 years later

1) Smoking status

2) Marital status3)Education4) Age

Self-report Categorized as leisure time or job-related PA Scale adapted from the Physical Activity History (PAH)

Smoking – NS

Marital status – NS

Divorce – NS

Education (higher) predicted increase in PA

Yes 12

10

(Minnesota) in women but NS for men

Age – Significant and meaningful for older age and decline in PA

Fuchs (1996)[99]

N = 299 Mean age: 52.2

Females: 149 Berlin

Spring and summer/fall

1) Intention 2) Self-efficacy 3) Social support

Self-reportExercise behavior assessed by 5 items referring to activities or activity by groups (i.e. biking, endurance exercise, sports games)

Intention sig for adoption and maintenance .18

Self-efficacy – adoption NS

Social support sig in adoption .23

No 10

Godin (2009)[94]

N = 91Mean age: 40.9Females: 40Males: 51 Quebec City, Canada

3 months 1) Perceived behavioral control/self-efficacy2) Intention 3) Perceived built environment (accessibility and connectivity; aesthetics;

Self-reportLeisure-time PA "Within the last 3 months, how often did you participate in one or more physical activities of moderate intensity, totaling at least 30 min in a same day during your leisure time? (Validated measure by Gionet and Godin)

PBC/self-efficacy- NS

Intention was a significant and meaningful predictor of PA

Accessibility/connectivity – NS

Safety – NS

Aesthetics - NS

No 10

Grace (2006)[107]

N= 243Females only Mean age: 39.5 Canada

Maternity group and control group. Measured at baseline, maternity leave and returning

Pregnancy/parenthood Self-report PA Health-promoting lifestyle profile II

Motherhood - NS No 13

to work (average 16 months)

Gunnel (2014)[90]

N= 203 adults Mean age: 32.57Female – 68%Canada

6 month follow up

1) Attitude/outcome expectation

Self-reportLight, moderate and strenuous exercise Leisure time Exercise Questionnaire (LTEQ)

Attitude/outcome expectation - NS

Yes 13

Hamer (2012)[46]

Kouvonen (2011)[108]

N = 394 - 5395 Mean age: 54 WhiteHall study Europe

13 year follow-up (1997 – 2010)

5 year follow up (phase 5 1997-1999 and phase 7 of study 2002-2004)

1) Smoking 2) Education 3) Employment

4) Social support

Moderate to vigorous Self-report at baseline, objectively measured with accelerometers at follow-up

Smoking – NS

Education significant and meaningful for higher levels predicting PA increase

Employment - NS

Social support NS OR = 1.34 (maintaining), social support (improving) OR = 1.25

No 11

12

Hawkley (2009)[51]

N = 229 Ages 50 - 68 Chicago Health Longitudinal Study

Longitudinal Tested annually for 3 years Analysis carried out between subjects

1) Loneliness (social isolation)2) Age 3) Gender 4) Ethnicity5) Education

Self-report Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire Categorized. Self-report MVPA

Higher levels of loneliness predicted a decrease in PA OR = 1.57

Age - NS

Gender – NS

Ethnicity – NS

Education - NS

No 13

Higgins (1999)[39]

N = 258 Female onlyMean age: 20.6

18 month Longitudinal study

1) Desire (strength, permanence, stability) (attitude/outcome expectancy)

Self-report Increased cons associated with decrease in PA = -.15

Yes 11

Australia 2) Perceived behavioural control/ Self-efficacy

Used a PA level scale from Weir, Jackson, and Pinkerton (1989)

Higher self-efficacy/PBC associated with increase in PA = .31, .19

Hull (2010) [52]

N = 646

M: 52% F: 48% Mean age: 24.7

University of Pittsburgh Physical Activity Study

2 year follow-up

Self-report 1) Age2) Gender3) Ethnicity4) Income5) Education6) Marital status 7) Having a child (parenthood)

Self-report Past Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire MVPA

Age – NS

Gender – Significant and meaningful for males greater decline than females =.21

Ethnicity – NS

Income – NS

Education – NS

Marriage/cohabitation – NS

Parenthood – Significant and meaningful decline in PA among women -.48; Significant and meaningful decline in PA among males moderate effect size

Yes 13

Ingledew (1998)[72]

N = 425 Males: 282 Females: 143 Mean age: 37.8British Government employees

3 month Exercise motivation 1)Attitude/outcome expectancy2) Affective judgement3) Gender

Self-reportRegular exercise in leisure time adapted, categorised with TTM

Gender – NS

Attitude/outcome expectancy – NS

Affective judgement – Large effect for overall PA change

No 7

Kaplan (1991) [75]

N = 4025Males: 1781Females: 2238 Alameda Country Study Data came from the Human Population Laboratory's 24 -year study of adult residences Alameda Country, California

Longitudinal - interviewed in 1965 and 1974

1) Ethnicity/race2) Family income3) Occupation/employment4) Marriage/cohabitation5) Social isolation

Self-report

List of activities Constructed a 4 item Leisure-time physical activity index

Ethnicity – Significant for whites reporting more positive changes in PA compared to blacks

Income – Lower income related to decrease in PA in women but not men

Employment – Significant and meaningful for blue collar workers decrease PA more than white collar workers but not for women

Marriage/cohabitation – Significant and meaningful for marriage and PA increase

Social isolation – Significant and meaningful for PA decline

No 7

Kern (2010)[68]

N = 1,409 Males: 798 Females: 611 Terman Life Cycle Study 1922 California

Longitudinal Took qualitative information to examine PA changes across 4 decades

1) Measures of child and adult personality (neuroticism)2) Sex

Self-report Determined MET from qualitative data

Neuroticism – For men significant and meaningful for lower neuroticism but NS for women

Extraversion were more active

Conscientiousness – NS

Sex - NS

No 7

King (1998)

N = 558 - 1033 302 women and

Assessments completed at 5

1) Marital status Self-report Marital status (marriage)– NS

Yes 9

[104]

Rimal (2001)[93]

256 menAges 25 to 75 years Stanford Five City Project (California)

time points across 10 years

2) Exercise knowledge3) Exercise self-efficacy

From interviewer administered single item question on 7 -point Likert Scale

Marital status (divorce) – NS

Knowledge of PA - NS

PBC/self-efficacy – Significant and meaningful for higher PBC/self-efficacy and positive change in PA

11

Klesges(1992)[35]

N=120 adults males (non-smokers n=101; smokers n = 19)Mean age (non-smokers) 34.6 years, (smokers) 36.5 years) U.S.

Longitudinal 3 years

1) Smoking Self-report BAECKE NS No 10

Koenman (2012)[30]

N=186 Two groups, used the younger group Mean age 53.7 years Netherlands

LASA study – Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam

10 years follow-up

Life events 1) Widowhood 2) Retirement

Self-reportDaily MVPA and sport or exercise in previous two weeks LASA physical activity questionnaire (LAPAQ)

N/a

Widowhood excluded only looked at in older age group Excluded for retirement

No 12

Kwan(2010)[101]

N = 127Mean age: 22.467 females; 62 males

United States

3 months 1) Affective response Self-report 3 study designed questions targeting voluntary aerobic exercise

SR 7 day Physical Activity Revall (PAR)

Positive affect during exercise predicted PA at follow up β = 0.62, p = 0.03

Yes 14

Laaksonen (2002)[69]

N = 5494 Males: 2229 Females: 2852 Ages 20 - 64 years Finnish adults

Longitudinal Baseline and 7 years later

1) Smoking 2) Sex

Self-report

Single item question on moderately strenuous leisure time PA on six point scale

Smoking – No meaningful effects

Sex - NS

No 10

Lahti (2011)[53]

N = 7332 Ages 40-60 years City of Helsinki, Finland

Helsinki Health Study questionnaire

Survey 2000-2002 and again in 2007

1) Age2) Sex

Self-report

Total PA "Average weekly hours of leisure-time PA exercise within the previous 12 months"

Activities

Converted into MET-minutes per week

Age unclear statisticsSex - NS

No 12

Lee (2005)[33]

N = 80, 944 Females only Ages 46-71 years U.S.

4 year follow up 1) Marital transitions Self-reportFrequency of engagement in 8 common activities. Converted to MET-hours per week

Marriage/cohabitation - No meaningful effect

Divorce - NS

No 10

Lippke (2007)[95]

N = 1,831 Mean age: 46.6 Females: 61% Hawaii

Baseline and 6 month, and 12 months

1) Perceived behavioural control2) Intention

Self-reportTwo items from the International Physical Activity

Perceived behavioural control for maintenance of PA – No meaningful effects

No 12

Questionnaire Intention – Adoption of PA medium effect = .46, for maintenance = .18

Luszczynska (2007)[97]

N = 139Males: 80% Mean age: 29.5United Kingdom

2 year follow-up

1) Intention 2) Maintenance self-efficacy 3) Recovery self-efficacy

Self-reportRunning/jogging behavior, measured with one item

Intention – Significant and meaningful for greater intention and increase in PA

Self-efficacy – Significant and meaningful for higher self-efficacy and increase in PA

No 8

Macera (1995)[76]

N = 2533 Females: 1,542 Males: 991 Mean age: 46.25 Biracial South Carolina U.S.

4 year follow-up

1) Education 2) Smoking status 3) Ethnicity

Self-report Developed for the study. Questions referring to leisure-time PA during the past month and specific activities in the past week Classified as either inactive or active

Education – significant and meaningful for higher levels of education and higher levels of PA (for white women OR = 1.7; for African-American women OR = 3.1)

Smoking- NS

Ethnicity – White women more active over time then black women; NS for men

No 12

O’doughtery (2012)[40]

N = 127 women

Ages: 18 – 30 years

WISER study

Intervention was controlled for

PA measured at year 1 and 2

1) Ethnicity 2) Education 3) Married 4) Parenthood 5) Employment

Self-reportActivities transformed into METS per week

Self-report

MAQ

Ethnicity – NS

Education – NS

Marriage/cohabitation - NS

Parenthood – OR = 1.3 for those not meeting PA

No 13

recommendations at follow-up

Employment – NS

Panagiotakos (2008)[54]

N = 1955 (for analysis)

From total sample: Males: 1514 Females: 1528

Ages: 20-87 years old

Athens, GreeceATTICA study

5 year longitudinal

1) Age2) Sex3) Income4) Education5) Smoking6) Alcohol

Self-report

IPAQ

Age - NS for overall change in PA; Age significant and meaningful for maintainers being younger than relapsers

Sex - NS

Income – NS

Education – NS

Smoking – NS

Alcohol - NS

No 13

Pereira (2007)[41]

N= 1242 Females onlyMean age: 32.5

Boston, Massachusetts

Year and a half follow up

Before pregnancy to six months post-partum

1) Age 2) Ethnicity 3) Marital status 4) Education 5) Income 6) Employment during early pregnancy 7) Employment change from early pregnancy to 6 months postpartum

Self-report

Modification of leisure time activity section of Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE)

-Prior to pregnancy 12 months recall

Age – NS

Ethnicity – Hispanic women were more active over time compared to white women; NS for all other ethnicities

Marriage/cohabitation – NS

Education – NS

Income – NS

Employment – NS

Divorce/separation – NS

Yes 10

Perkins (1993)[42]

N =488 Smokers (N=143); Former smokers (N = 121); Non-smokers (N = 224) Females Ages 42 - 50

Pennsylvania

3 year follow-up

Self-report 1) Smoking status

Self-report Paffenbarger Activity Questionnaire

Smoking – No meaningful effect

No 9

Picavet (2011)[63]

N = 4008

Males: 1555 Females: 1703 Mean age: 45.5

Doetinchem Cohort Study Monitoring project on cardiovascular disease risk factors, Europe

Netherlands

15 year follow-up, prospective observational population-based study

1) Age 2) Education 3) Sex 4) Paid job 5) Living status 6) Smoking 7) Alcohol consumption 8) Marital status

Self-reportLeisure time activities categorized into light or moderate to vigorous Self-report instrument designed for European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

Age – NS

Education – NS

Sex – NS

Employment – NS

Smoking – NS

Alcohol - NS

Marriage/cohabitation – NS

No 10

Plotnikoff (2012)[96]

N = 1427 Mean age: 37.5 years Males: 648 (45.4%)

15 year follow up

TPB constructs 1) Intention 2) PBC/self-efficacy

Self-reportModified version of the Minnesota Leisure-time PA questionnaire

Self/efficacy/PBC – Meaningful effect for PA increase

Baseline intention – Significant and meaningful .15

Yes 12

Racette (2013)[29]

N = 134 graduate students U.S.

Assessed at beginning and end of 3 year

1) Sleep Self-report

Select question from American College

N/a

Insufficient number of studies to form theme

N/a 9

National Health and Nutrition survey

curriculum Health association-National College Health Assessment

One week recall

Rhodes (2008)[88]

N = 616Mean age: 42.7 Females: 74.5%

Physical Activity Workplace Study (PAWS)

Canada

6 months 1) Attitude (affective)2) Attitude (instrumental)3) Perceived behavioral control4) Self-efficacy5) Processes of change6) Subjective norms

Self-reportMVPA over past week

Study specific questions

Instrumental attitude – adoption NS; Maintenance NS; PA con’s significant and meaningful for relapsers .4

Affective judgments – NS

PBC – Significant and meaningful - .41 for maintenance; NS for adoption

Self-efficacy – Maintainers .71; adopters no meaningful effect

Processes of change – Significant and meaningful for adoption of PA ES =.43; No meaningful effect for maintenance

Subjective norms - NS

No 13

Rhodes (2014)[45]

N=314 Ages 25-40 Female: 50%

Canada

12 months – 3 assessments

1) Parenthood Objective measure of PA GT1M activity monitor worn for 7 consecutive days

Parenthood – Significant and meaningful effect for decline in PA (small – medium effect for

Yes 13

Moderate-vigorous

SR daily activity log

women); NS for men

Sallis (1986) [55]

N = 1411Men: 652Women: 759 Ages 20 to 74 years Stanford Community Health Survey California United States

1 year 1) Age2) Sex3) Education4) Smoking5) Attitude6) Knowledge of PA7) PBC/self-efficacy

Self-report Three measures of PA 1) Moderate intensity activity 2)Vigorous intensity activity 3) Global activity change

Age – N/a

Analysis was not clear

Sex – NS

Education – NS

Smoking – NS

Attitude/outcome expectancy – Meaningful for women and positive attitude and positive change in PA; NS for men

Knowledge of PA – ns

PBC/self-efficacy – Meaningful for change in self-efficacy and change in PA in men; NS for women

No 8

Sallis (1992)[61]

Sallis (1992)[80]

N = 1719 - 1739 M: 48.31 years

(San Diego, California)

24-months Social learning theory 1) Self-efficacy 2) Age 3) Neighbourhood environment

4) Education 5) Friend support 6) Family support 7) Smoking 8) Convenience of facilities 9) Home equipment 10) Benefits 11) Physical activity history 12) Smoking

Self-report

Two PA measures looking at vigorous physical activity

Three measures of PA 1) Moderate intensity activity 2) Vigorous intensity activity 3) Global activity

Education – NS for overall PA change; Meaningful effects for PA adoption and women (-.46) ; NS for men and adoption

Accessibility/connectivity NS for overall PA change; meaningful for maintenance among men (-.27) but NS for women

Safety – NS

No 11

11

13) Alcohol

Based on social cognitive theory:1) Self-efficacy 2) Modeling (surrounding friends family who exercise regularly) 3) Friend support 4) Family support 5) Barriers 6) Benefits 7) Exercise knowledge 8) Normative beliefs 9) Sports media 10) Home equipment 11) Age 12) Gender 13) Education 14) Smoking 15) Alcohol 16) Exercise history 17) Neighbourhood environment 18) Convenience of facilities

change Age – NS (d=-.03)

Sex – NS

Smoking – NS for overall PA change; Adoption meaningful effect for lower smoking in females (.3) but NS for males; NS for maintenance

Alcohol – NS

Attitude/outcome expectancy – Meaningful effect for more expected benefits of PA related to adoption for men but not women; Meaningful for maintenance and more expected PA benefits for men (-.45) but not women

Knowledge of PA – NS

PBC/self-efficacy – Higher self-efficacy related to maintenance for men (.56) but not women

Social support – Meaningful effects for women with higher social support and PA adoption; No effects for men; Maintenance NS

Subjective norm - NS

Sallis (2001)[43]

N = 226 females only N = 129 Mexican-American Mean age: 31.5N = 97 European American women Mean age: 32.3 years

Study of Children’s Activityand Nutrition (SCAN) (San Diego, California)

Longitudinal, baseline and follow up 7 years later

Self-report (interviews) 1) Ethnicity 3) Education 4) Work activity 5) Work hours

Self-report

7 day physical activity recall (PAR)

Total energy expenditure

Ethnicity – NS

Education – NS

Employment – Meaningful effects for increase in work hours among Hispanic mothers related to PA increase (.31)

No 12

Sallis (2007)[109]

N = 861 Females: 387; Males: 474 Ages 35 - 75 years

United States

Baseline and 6 month (Intervention but found no effects)

Neighbourhood environment: 1) Sidewalks2) Heavy traffic3) Hills4) Streetlights5) dogs unattended6) enjoyable scenery7) Sightings of people exercising8) Crime

Self-reportValidated 7-day physical activity recall interview

Accessibility/connectivity – NS

Safety - Loose dogs and higher perceived crime small effect for lower PA among women (d=.11,d=.09); NS for men; For adoption safety was meaningful for lower adoption among males but NS for females; NS for maintenance

Aesthetics – NS

No 9

Shaw (2010)[65]

N = 3360 Mean age: 54.2 Americans'

3 years 1) Age 2) Sex3) Ethnicity

Self-report

Study created 3

Age - Older adults and decrease in PA (β-.86)

Yes 10

Changing Lives Study

United States

4) Education5) Occupational type6) Marriage/cohabitation7) Social integration 6) Social support

questions

LTPA

Sex – NS

Ethnicity – Meaningful for whites declining PA compared to blacks (-1.07)

Education – NS

Employment – NS

Marriage/cohabitation – Meaningful effects for marriage and increase in PA

Social support - NS

Steptoe (1995)[70]

N= 282 students Netherlands

2 years; Assessment at 12 months at 2 year

1) Awareness of health risk 2) Desire to increase exercise levels 3) Gender 4) Beliefs in importance for health

Self-report PA assessed with validated measure with questions regarding PA over past two weeks. Categorized into non-exercisers, 1-4 sessions, and 5 or more sessions

Intention - NS

Sex – NS

Attitude/outcome expectancy – Meaningful effect for beliefs in importance for health and increase in PA

Knowledge of PA – NS

No 11

Stetson (2005)[31]

N = 65Mean age: 38.8Males: 28Females: 37

United States

3 months 1) Baseline exercise history 2) Exercise cognitions and perceptions 3) Self-identified high risk situations 4) Coding of high risk situation characteristics

Self-report

Exercise and health history questionnaire

Composite of 3 items, exercise history, frequency, duration

N/A – did not fit in themes

No 10

Sugiyama (2013)[66]

N = 1036 adultsMean age: 48.6Males: 39.1 Adelaide, Australia

4 separate assessments 4 year longitudinal

1) Perceived attributes of neighbourhood green spaces, 2) GIS-derived size and number of green spaces Covariates 3) Gender 4) Age 5) Education 6) Work status 7) Having a child in the household 8) Income 9) BMI 10) Behavioural variables 11) TV viewing

Self-report

Recreational walking study designed question

Accessibility/convenience – NS for adoption; Proximity to green space related to maintenance of walking

Aesthetics – NS

Sex – NS

Age – NS

Education – NS

Employment – NS

Parenthood – NS

Income – NS

No 9

Titze (2005)[44]

N = 539 females

74.4% were > 35 years

Selected from those who registered in a 7.9 km fun run

Graz, Austria

2 year follow-up

1) Behavioural processes of change 2) Motive enjoyment 3) Motive enjoyment (family support)4) Environment – aesthetics5) Environment – safety6) Environment - Accessibility

Self-reportLooked at running for PA 16 items participants either 'approved' or 'disapproved'

Attitude/outcome expectations – NS for adoption; NS for maintenance

Affective judgments – Meaningful for adoption of PA; NS for maintenance

Cognitive and behavioral processes of change – Meaningful for adoption (OR = 4.02); NS for maintenance

Social support – No

No 11

meaningful effects

Accessibility/connectivity – No effects

Safety – No effects

Aesthetics – No meaningful effects

Touvier (2010)[71]

N = 1389 Males: 698 Females: 691 Ages 45-64 years

France

3 years Self-report 1) Retirement(excluded)2) Sex

Self-report Leisure time PA assessed using Modifiable Activity Questionnaire (MAQ)

MVPA – total MET’s per week

Sex – NS No 9

Umberson (1992)[105]

N = 2867 Mean age: 53.64 Female: 63%

United States

3 year follow up 1) Marital transitions (divorce)2) Marital transitions (marriage/cohabitation)

Self-report

Index based on three questions

Average total PA

Marriage/cohabitation – No meaningful effects

Divorce – No meaningful effects

Yes 10

Weiss (2007)[58]

N = 765

Ages 17-65Males: 47%Females: 53%

Coeur en Sante(St. Henri, Montreal, Canada)

5 year study Self-report 1) BMI 2) Smoking status 3) Self-rated health 4) Social support for PA 5) Use of neighbourhood facility for PA 7) Gender 8) Age 9) Income

Self-report through telephone interviews Frequency of Leisure Time Physical Activity (assessed in two questions) Responses were summed to create a LTPA score

Smoking – NS

Social support – No meaningful effects

Sex – Meaningful effects for relapse in PA compared to men (OR = 1.58)

Age – No meaningful

No 9

10) Level of education 11) Self-efficacy

effects

Income – NS

Education – Meaningful effect for lower education and decrease in PA (OR = 0.74)

Self-efficacy – Meaningful for higher levels and positive change in PA (OR = 1.6)

Wells (2008)[32]

N= 32 Mean age: 38.7Females only

United States

3 year follow up. Pre and post move

Neighbourhood characteristics:1) Neighbourhood type 2) Street-network patterns 3) Land-use conditions

Objective measure - Pedometers for 4 days

Self-report daily activity log

Accessibility/connectivity – Meaningful effects for improvements to access and decrease in objectively measured walking

Yes 9

Williams (2008)[102]

N = 37Mean age: 43.92Females: 78.4%

United States

12 month long with assessments at 6 and 12 months

1) Acute affective response Self-report

Physical activity recallMVPA

Affective response during exercise predicted 6 month PA β = .51, p=.013 and 12 month PA β = .45, p = 0.047

Yes 14

Williams (2012) [103]

N = 146Mean age: 47.6 Females: 87.0%

United States

12 months long with assessments at 6 and 12 months

1) Affective valence (using feeling scale during exercise)

Self-report

Physical activity recallMVPA

During-walk feeling scale predicted month 12 PA levels β = 14.8, p = 0.030

Yes 14

White (2012)[89]

N = 321 Mean age: 63. 8 Female: 80.1 %;

United States

18 months Social cognitive theory

1) Self-efficacy 2) Disability 3) Limitations 4) Goals 5) Outcome expectations 6) Physical activity at baseline 7) self-evaluation outcome expectations 8) social outcome expectations

Self-report

Physical activity scale for the elderly (PASE)

Total MET’s per week

Attitude/outcome expectancy – Mixed, physical outcome expectations ES=.13; Social outcome expectations ES = .14

Self-efficacy – Meaningful for increase in PA ES=.19

No 12

Zimmerman (2008) [59]

N = 2957 Ages 16-64 years

Denmark

6 year follow up 1) Social position 2) Occupation 3) Education 4) Age 5) Marital status 6) Self-rated health 7) Sustained chronic disease 8) Smoking status 9) Alcohol consumption 10) BMI 11) Health belief 12) Meeting with friends and family

Self-report Questions about activities and exercise in a week

Categorized as physically active or physically inactive

Education - NS

Age - NS

Employment – NS

Smoking – NS for adoption; meaningful for PA relapse (OR=2.18 males, 2.41 females)

Alcohol – NS

Marriage/cohabitation – NS for adoption; meaningful for married men less likely to maintain PA (OR=1.78);

No 9

NS for maintenance and married women

Divorce – NS

Social isolation – NS for maintenance; meaningful effect for more isolation less likely to adopt PA OR = 2.71

Note: Gray shaded area = same dataset; NS = Non-significant; NE = No effect; OR = Odds Ratio; PA = Physical activity; ES = Effect Size; BMI = Body Mass Index; MET = Metabolic Equivalent; LTPA = Leisure time physical activity MVPA = Moderate-to vigorous physical activity; IPAQ = International Physical Activity Questionnaire; TTM = Transtheoretical Model; MAQ = Modifiable Activity Questionnaire.