Abstract
Purpose.
Determine if recruitment methods are differentially related to the reach of a physical activity program in metro/urban vs. rural settings.
Design.
Cross-sectional survey.
Setting.
Kansas counties.
Subjects.
Ninety-four Cooperative Extension agents responsible for 102 counties.
Measures.
Promotional score, task force activity, and years of program delivery were assessed using a self-report survey. Reach was assessed for each county by dividing the number of participants by intended population using census data.
Analysis.
Rural/urban comparisons on reach were completed using a Mann-Whitney test. Multiple linear regression models were used to determine the relationship between independent variables and participation rate by setting type.
Results.
Metro/urban counties had lower mean participation rates than rural counties (z = −4.5; p < .001). In metro/urban counties, the regression on participation rate was significant (R2 = .19; F = 4.09; p = .011), but only promotional score significantly contributed to the model (p = .003). In rural counties, the regression was also significant (R2 = .34; F = 6.64; p = .001), with task force activity and years of delivery making significant contributions (p = .001 and p = .017, respectively).
Conclusion.
Interpersonal methods may be more effective in recruiting physical activity program participants in rural settings, whereas using a greater variety of promotional methods may be more effective in metro/urban settings.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
