Table 1

Source studies, summary relative risks for physical inactivity and associated global population attributable risks

Outcome/studyStudy designComparisons for summary relative riskSummary relative risk (95% CI)PARsemi (95% CI)
All-cause mortality
Lee et al, 20122
Meta-analysis of 32 prospective cohort studiesLow vs moderate leisure-time physical activity1.28 (1.21 to 1.36)7.2 (5.4 to 9.0)
Cardiovascular disease mortality
Cheng et al, 201814
Meta-analysis of 40 prospective cohort studiesLow vs moderate recreational physical activity1.30 (1.23 to 1.35)7.6 (6.1 to 9.3)
Dementia
Guure et al, 201715
Meta-analysis of 15 prospective cohort studiesLowest vs moderate levels of physical activity1.32 (1.06 to 1.64)8.1 (2.6 to 14.9)
Depression
Schuch et al, 201813
Meta-analysis of 4 prospective cohort studiesLowest vs 150 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week1.28 (1.01 to 1.62)7.2 (1.3 to 14.5)
Coronary Heart Disease
Kyu et al, 201611
Meta-analysis of 43 prospective cohort studies<600 MET-min/week vs 600–3999 MET-min/week of total physical activity across all domains1.19 (1.13 to 1.26)5.0 (3.5 to 6.5)
Stroke
Kyu et al, 201611
Meta-analysis of 26 prospective cohort studies<600 MET-min/week vs 600–3999 MET-min/week of total physical activity across all domains1.19 (1.09 to 1.28)5.0 (2.9 to 7.3)
Type 2 diabetes
Kyu et al, 201611
Meta-analysis of 55 prospective cohort studies<600 MET-min/week vs 600–3999 MET-min/week of total physical activity across all domains1.17 (1.11 to 1.23)4.5 (3.1 to 6.0)
Hypertension
Liu et al, 201712
Meta-analysis of 24 prospective cohort studiesNone vs 10 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity1.06 (1.03 to 1.09)1.6 (1.0 to 2.4)
Bladder cancer
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.08 (0.93 to 1.25)2.2 (-0.3 to 16.2)
Breast Cancer*
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.09 (1.03 to 1.15)2.8 (1.2 to 4.4)
Colon Cancer
Matthews et al 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.11 (1.03 to 1.19)2.9 (1.2 to 4.9)
Endometrial cancer*
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.09 (0.96 to 1.22)2.8 (-0.4 to 6.4)
Oesophageal cancer
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.28 (0.85 to 1.96)7.2 (-2.3 to 20.9)
Gastric cancer
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.27 (0.93 to 1.69)6.9 (-0.3 to 16.2)
Renal cancer
Matthews et al, 202016
Pooled analysis of data from 9 prospective cohortsNone vs 7.5–14.9 MET-hour/week of leisure-time physical activity.1.28 (1.06 to 1.54)7.2 (2.4 to 12.9)
  • The global prevalence of insufficient physical activity of 27.5% (95% CI 25.0% to 32.2%) was applied to compute the PARsemi.

  • *The global prevalence of insufficient physical activity among women of 31.7% (95% CI 28.6% to 39.0%) was applied to compute the PARsemi for breast cancer and endometrial cancer.

  • PAR, population attributable risk.