IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2019i1p98-d300759.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Increased Physical Activity in Preparation for a Women-Only Mass Participation Sport Event: A Framework for Estimating the Health Impact

Author

Listed:
  • Jelle Schoemaker

    (Sports & Exercise Studies, Sports & Economics Research Centre, HAN University of Applied Sciences, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands)

  • Simon van Genderen

    (Sports & Exercise Studies, Sports & Economics Research Centre, HAN University of Applied Sciences, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands)

  • Willem I. J. de Boer

    (Sports & Exercise Studies, Sports & Economics Research Centre, HAN University of Applied Sciences, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, The Netherlands
    Department of Economics and Business, Groningen University, 9747 AJ Groningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Mass participation sporting events (MPSEs) are increasing in popularity. However, little research exists into the potential value of these events for improving public health by enhancing physical activity (PA). The aim of this study is to estimate the health impact of increased physical activity as a result of preparing for an MPSE. Participants of a mass participation women-only running event were asked if they performed additional PA in preparation of the event, including the length (weeks) and intensity (min per week). Additionally, self-reported change in health status was evaluated. Based on these results, we have developed a framework for estimating the cumulatively gained quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and monetary value thereof. Of the respondents ( N = 468; mean age 42.3 ± 11.9 years), 32% performed additional vigorous PA in preparation of the event, with an average of 63 min per week over 8.8 weeks. Performing additional vigorous PA significantly improved the odds of self-rated health. The estimated total health impact of participants preparing for the Marikenloop was 6.6 QALYs gained with a corresponding monetary value between EUR 133,000 and EUR 532,000. We believe our health impact framework helps to understand that MPSEs can be a notable part of the public health domain.

Suggested Citation

  • Jelle Schoemaker & Simon van Genderen & Willem I. J. de Boer, 2019. "Increased Physical Activity in Preparation for a Women-Only Mass Participation Sport Event: A Framework for Estimating the Health Impact," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:98-:d:300759
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/98/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/98/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & White, Mathew P. & Hattam, Caroline & Lannin, Aisling & Harvey, Andrea & Spencer, Anne, 2016. "Valuing the health benefits of physical activities in the marine environment and their importance for marine spatial planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 144-152.
    2. McCabe, C & Claxton, K & Culyer, AJ, 2008. "The NICE Cost-Effectiveness Threshold: What it is and What that Means," MPRA Paper 26466, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Moseley, Darren & Connolly, Thomas & Sing, Louise & Watts, Kevin, 2018. "Developing an indicator for the physical health benefits of recreation in woodlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 420-432.
    4. Ewa Malchrowicz-Mośko & Joanna Poczta & Katarzyna Adamczewska, 2019. "The Potential of Non-Mega Sporting Events for the Promotion of Physical Activity Among Inactive Supporters at the Poznan Half Marathon: A Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-12, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Screening of Dementia," Working Papers 2018:20, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    2. Ryuichi Ohta & Yoshinori Ryu & Daisuke Kataoka & Chiaki Sano, 2021. "Effectiveness and Challenges in Local Self-Governance: Multifunctional Autonomy in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-14, January.
    3. John Vernon & Robert Goldberg & Joseph Golec, 2009. "Economic Evaluation and Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(10), pages 797-806, October.
    4. Scott Metcalfe & Rachel Grocott, 2010. "Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950-2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-4, April.
    5. Marieke Krol & Jocé Papenburg & Siok Swan Tan & Werner Brouwer & Leona Hakkaart, 2016. "A noticeable difference? Productivity costs related to paid and unpaid work in economic evaluations on expensive drugs," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(4), pages 391-402, May.
    6. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Alexander Dobruschkin & Gunhild von Amsberg & Judith Dams, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    7. Sanjib Saha & Ulf-G Gerdtham & Pia Johansson, 2010. "Economic Evaluation of Lifestyle Interventions for Preventing Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-46, August.
    8. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Nonpharmacological Interventions for Dementia Patients and their Caregivers - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:10, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    9. Pelletier, Marie-Chantale & Heagney, Elizabeth & Kovač, Mladen, 2021. "Valuing recreational services: A review of methods with application to New South Wales National Parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    10. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Katharina Schremser & Wolf Rogowski & Sigrid Adler-Reichel & Amanda Tufman & Rudolf Huber & Björn Stollenwerk, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness of an Individualized First-Line Treatment Strategy Offering Erlotinib Based on EGFR Mutation Testing in Advanced Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients in Germany," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(11), pages 1215-1228, November.
    12. Klingler, Corinna & Shah, Sara M.B. & Barron, Anthony J.G. & Wright, John S.F., 2013. "Regulatory space and the contextual mediation of common functional pressures: Analyzing the factors that led to the German Efficiency Frontier approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 270-280.
    13. Rachel Elliott & Koen Putman & Matthew Franklin & Lieven Annemans & Nick Verhaeghe & Martin Eden & Jasdeep Hayre & Sarah Rodgers & Aziz Sheikh & Anthony Avery, 2014. "Cost Effectiveness of a Pharmacist-Led Information Technology Intervention for Reducing Rates of Clinically Important Errors in Medicines Management in General Practices (PINCER)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 573-590, June.
    14. Job F. H. Eijsink & Mohamed N. M. T. Al Khayat & Cornelis Boersma & Peter G. J. Horst & Jan C. Wilschut & Maarten J. Postma, 2021. "Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C virus screening, and subsequent monitoring or treatment among pregnant women in the Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(1), pages 75-88, February.
    15. Stefano Capri & Rosella Levaggi, 2011. "Shifting the risk in pricing and reimbursement schemes? A model of risk-sharing agreements for innovative drugs," DEP - series of economic working papers 2/2011, University of Genoa, Research Doctorate in Public Economics.
    16. Nadine Schur & Salvatore Brugaletta & Angel Cequier & Andrés Iñiguez & Antonio Serra & Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo & Vicente Mainar & Gianluca Campo & Maurizio Tespili & Peter den Heijer & Armando Bethencou, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness of everolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: An analysis from the EXAMINATION randomized controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, August.
    17. Dunning, Kelly H., 2021. "Adaptive governance of recreational ecosystem services following a major hurricane," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    18. Anne Girault & Chloe Gerves-Pinquie & Serena Phillips & Sarah Raskin & Mandi Pratt-Chapman, 2018. "Economic evaluation of patient navigation programs in colorectal cancer care, a systematic review," Post-Print hal-01973691, HAL.
    19. Chloé Gervès-Pinquié & Anne Girault & Serena Phillips & Sarah Raskin & Mandi Pratt-Chapman, 2018. "Economic evaluation of patient navigation programs in colorectal cancer care, a systematic review," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    20. Benjamin Cadier & Isabelle Durand-Zaleski & Daniel Thomas & Karine Chevreul, 2016. "Cost Effectiveness of Free Access to Smoking Cessation Treatment in France Considering the Economic Burden of Smoking-Related Diseases," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:98-:d:300759. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.