article · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Physical inactivity among undergraduate university students has been considered a public health concern. To address this, researchers have utilized consensus workshop approaches to develop effective physical activity (PA) recommendations. However, the existing research has limitations: it is outdated, not context-specific to young adults, and does not account for psychosocial factors (such as mental health, motivation, and social support) that hinder or promote PA behavior, particularly in South Africa. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to engage with stakeholders to achieve a consensus on a set of context-specific guidelines to enhance the physical activities of undergraduate university students. Utilizing the Social Ecological Model, this study employed two online consensus workshops with 25 purposively selected stakeholders (Round 1 = 8 and Round 2 = 17). Stakeholders were divided into breakout rooms via the Google Meets feature, to discuss and brainstorm the guidelines, expressing their agreement or disagreement with the proposed names and descriptions. The consensus was considered achieved when the majority of stakeholder responses fell into the 'Agree with the guideline' category. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used to generate common themes, which were then coded via Atlas Ti. V8. Stakeholders reached a consensus on four categories and 32 guidelines, namely, PA (9 guidelines), mental health (7 guidelines), motivation (9 guidelines), and social support (7 guidelines). Each category, along with its respective set of guidelines, provides insights into the type of information undergraduate students require to enhance their PA participation. Using a consensus workshop facilitated the co-creation of context-specific guidelines to enhance the physical activities of undergraduate university students. This approach proved to be a valuable tool for fostering collaboration between academic staff and students.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph21121651
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.