No abstract

ObjectiveTo assess the relationships between golf and health.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPublished and unpublished reports of any age or language, identified by searching electronic databases, platforms, reference lists, websites and from consulting experts.Review methodsA 3-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies as well as grey literature. Identified studies were screened for final inclusion. Data were extracted using a standardised tool, to form (1) a descriptive analysis and (2) a thematic summary.Results and discussion4944 records were identified with an initial search. 301 studies met criteria for the scoping review. Golf can provide moderate intensity physical activity and is associated with physical health benefits that include improved cardiovascular, respiratory and metabolic profiles, and improved wellness. There is limited evidence related to golf and mental health. The incidence of golfing injury is moderate, with back injuries the most frequent. Accidental head injuries are rare, but can have serious consequences.ConclusionsPractitioners and policymakers can be encouraged to support more people to play golf, due to associated improved physical health and mental well-being, and a potential contribution to increased life expectancy. Injuries and illnesses associated with golf have been identified, and risk reduction strategies are warranted. Further research priorities include systematic reviews to further explore the cause and effect nature of the relationships described. Research characterising golf's contribution to muscular strengthening, balance and falls prevention as well as further assessing the associations and effects between golf and mental health are also indicated.

KeywordsWeight loss, weight maintenance, men and women, systematic review 3 AcknowledgementsThis review is one of a series of systematic reviews for the ROMEO project (Review Of MEn and Conflict of interestThe authors have no conflict of interests to declare. Contribution of authorsCR drafted the manuscript under the supervision of AA. FS developed and ran the electronic literature search. CR and AA conducted the eligibility screening, data extraction and quality assessment. All authors contributed to the study design and manuscript preparation. 5 AbstractWe systematically reviewed the randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence for long-term (>12 months) weight management interventions for obese men in contrast to women to help understand whether programmes should be designed differently for men.We searched 11 databases up to October 2014. Twenty-two RCTs reported data separately for men and women in weight loss or weight maintenance interventions.We found men were under-represented in RCTs of weight loss interventions open to both sexes. Men comprised 36% of participants (4771 from 13,305 participants). Despite this, men were 11% (95% CI 8% to 14%, p<0.001) more likely to be trial completers compared to women. The trials did not report service user consultation and none were designed to investigate whether men and women responded differently to given interventions. Our meta-analysis of 13 trials showed no significant difference in weight loss between men and women, either for weight loss in kg ( p=0.90) or percentage weight loss (p=0.78), although men tended to lose more weight with intensive low fat reducing diets, with or without meal replacements, and structured physical activity/exercise programmes than women.Orlistat was less beneficial for men for weight maintenance. Individual support and tailoring appeared more helpful for men than women.We found evidence that men and women respond differently to, and have different preferences for, varying types of weight management programme. We suggest that it is important to understand men's views on weight loss, as this is likely to also improve the uptake and effectiveness of programmes for men.

ObjectivesTo investigate what weight management interventions work for men, with which men, and under what circumstances.DesignRealist synthesis of qualitative studies.Data sourcesSensitive searches of 11 electronic databases from 1990 to 2012 supplemented by grey literature searches.Study selectionStudies published between 1990 and 2012 reporting qualitative research with obese men, or obese men in contrast to obese women and lifestyle or drug weight management were included. The studies included men aged 16 years or over, with no upper age limit, with a mean or median body mass index of 30 kg/m2 in all settings.Results22 studies were identified, including 5 qualitative studies linked to randomised controlled trials of weight maintenance interventions and 8 qualitative studies linked to non-randomised intervention studies, and 9 relevant UK-based qualitative studies not linked to any intervention. Health concerns and the perception that certain programmes had ‘worked’ for other men were the key factors that motivated men to engage with weight management programmes. Barriers to engagement and adherence with programmes included: men not problematising their weight until labelled ‘obese’; a lack of support for new food choices by friends and family, and reluctance to undertake extreme dieting. Retaining some autonomy over what is eaten; flexibility about treats and alcohol, and a focus on physical activity were attractive features of programmes. Group interventions, humour and social support facilitated attendance and adherence. Men were motivated to attend programmes in settings that were convenient, non-threatening and congruent with their masculine identities, but men were seldom involved in programme design.ConclusionsMen's perspectives and preferences within the wider context of family, work and pleasure should be sought when designing weight management services. Qualitative research is needed with men to inform all aspects of intervention design, including the setting, optimal recruitment processes and strategies to minimise attrition.