BackgroundPhysical inactivity across the lifespan remains a public health issue for many developed countries. Inactivity has contributed considerably to the pervasiveness of lifestyle diseases. Government, national and local agencies and organizations have been unable to systematically, and in a coordinated way, translate behavioral research into practice that makes a difference at a population level. One approach for mobilizing multi-level efforts to improve the environment for physical activity is to engage in a process of citizen science. Citizen Science here is defined as a participatory research approach involving members of the public working closely with research investigators to initiate and advance scientific research projects. However, there are no common measures or protocols to guide citizen science research at the local community setting.ObjectivesWe describe overarching categories of constructs that can be considered when designing citizen science projects expected to yield multi-level interventions, and provide an example of the citizen science approach to promoting PA. We also recommend potential measures across different levels of impact.DiscussionEncouraging some consistency in measurement across studies will potentially accelerate the efficiency with which citizen science participatory research provides new insights into and solutions to the behaviorally-based public health issues that drive most of morbidity and mortality. The measures described in this paper abide by four fundamental principles specifically selected for inclusion in citizen science projects: feasibility, accuracy, propriety, and utility. The choice of measures will take into account the potential resources available for outcome and process evaluation. Our intent is to emphasize the importance for all citizen science participatory projects to follow an evidence-based approach and ensure that they incorporate an appropriate assessment protocol.ConclusionsWe provided the rationale for and a list of contextual factors along with specific examples of measures to encourage consistency among studies that plan to use a citizen science participatory approach. The potential of this approach to promote health and wellbeing in communities is high and we hope that we have provided the tools needed to optimally promote synergistic gains in knowledge across a range of Citizen Science participatory projects.

The pilot study GESTALT shows that the concept of interactive knowledge to action has substantially contributed to the sustainability of a physical activity programme in the field of dementia prevention. For this purpose changes in local structures, as well as adaptations of the GESTALT programme to the existing structures of prevention practice had to be made. The approach of cooperative planning proved to be appropriate for the generation of knowledge in terms of practice-based evidence, and it favoured the reciprocal adaptation of the GESTALT programme and implementation contexts.

Movement as Investment for Health (Bewegung als Investition in Gesundheit or BIG) was a multidimensional research study in participatory physical activity promotion among socially disadvantaged women in a deprived neighbourhood in Erlangen, Germany. It aimed at making full use of health-promoting effects of movement and developing integrated evaluation through approaches from different disciplines. We defined the target population through national health survey data, and determined important intervention and evaluation dimensions through meta-analyses. A co-operative planning group of women, researchers, policy-makers, and local experts made decisions on the most appropriate procedures. Integrated evaluation in participatory approaches is promising. It calls for context-specific evaluation, requires adaptation of existing approaches or even development of its own evidence base.

Sustainable implementation of evidence-based health promotion programmes requires alternatives to recent deductive models of knowledge transfer. Interactive approaches prove to be promising alternatives. Simultaneously, they change the responsibilities of science, policy and public health practice. Existing boundaries within disciplines and sectors are overcome by arranging transdisciplinary teams as well as by developing common agendas and procedures. Such approaches also require adaptations of the structure of research projects such as extending the length of funding.

No abstract