Associations between individual, socio-economic and area-level characteristics and time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity in women.

<p>n.i. not included as not significant in univariate analysis, <b>–</b> not added into the model as not relevant β 95% CI indicates that regression coefficients, 95% confidence intervals and p values are given.</p

Reported time spent in MVPA by recorded time spent in MVPA.

<p>Numbers shown represent the number of participants in each group.</p

Associations between individual, socio-economic and area-level characteristics and time spent in moderate and vigorous physical activity in men.

<p>n.i. not included as not significant in univariate analysis, <b>–</b> not added into the model as not relevant. β (95% CI) p indicates that regression coefficients, 95% confidence intervals and p values are given.</p

Sample characteristics.

<p>Quartiles of IMD defined with reference to the sample population in analysis. p values refer to a test of the difference between men and women within the respective samples. Missing responses imputed with the most conservative responses (least likely to be associated with MVPA) to maximise sample size (n = 8 cases across all variables).</p

Additional file 1: of UK Preschool-aged children’s physical activity levels in childcare and at home: a cross-sectional exploration

Specially designed question to assess childcare attendance. (DOCX 16 kb

MOESM5 of Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation

Additional file 5: Figure S2. Radial Diagrams showing performance of the six highest performing tools in the user survey. The performance of the software tools in the user survey, considering the average score for each of the seven actions. The software tools in each plot are (a) Abstrackr, (b) Colandr, (c) Covidence, (d) DRAGON, (e) EPPI-Reviewer and (f) Rayyan. The actions are: (A1) creating an account, (A2) creating a systematic review project, (A3) importing references, (A4) inviting collaborators to join the project, (A5) carrying out T&Ab screening, (A6) exporting the screened references and (A7) finding and using the help section

MOESM1 of Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation

Additional file 1. Feature analysis assessment

MOESM4 of Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation

Additional file 4: Figure S1. Radial diagrams of six highest performing tools in the feature analysis. The performance of the six highest scoring software tools in the feature analysis by theme. The software tools in each plot are (a) Abstrackr, (b) Colandr, (c) Covidence, (d) DRAGON, (e) EPPI-Reviewer and (f) Rayyan. The themes are: (T1) Economic, (T2) Ease of Introduction and Setup, (T3) Systematic Review Support, (T4) Process Management, (T5) Reference Management, (T6) Workflow, (T7) Screening Features and (T8) Security. The features included in each theme can be found in Table 1

MOESM3 of Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation

Additional file 3. Complete list of software tools (with urls)

MOESM2 of Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation

Additional file 2. Questionnaire template