The Canadian 24-Hour Movement Guidelines for Adults aged 18-64 years and Adults aged 65 years and older (\"Guidelines\") integrate recommendations for physical activity, sedentary, and sleep behaviours. Given the novelty of these integrated Guidelines, it was important to consider messaging strategies that would be most effective in reaching Canadian adults. The purpose of this study was to examine optimal messaging of the Guidelines as it pertains to communication channels and messages. Representative samples of Guideline end-users (N = 1017) and stakeholders (N = 877) each completed a cross-sectional survey. Descriptive statistics were calculated along with tests of statistical significance. Inductive content analysis was used to code stakeholders\' comments (i.e., suggestions, concerns) on a draft version of the Guidelines. Most end-users had recently referred to online medical resources; family, friends, and co-workers; and physicians as communication channels for information regarding the movement behaviours. End-users and stakeholders felt that generic messages would foster self-efficacy to meet the Guidelines. Stakeholders highlighted a variety of considerations to ensure the Guidelines are inclusive towards diverse groups within the Canadian population. Findings will inform Guideline messaging. Novelty Most end-users referred to online medical resources; family, friends, and co-workers; and physicians as communication channels. End-users and stakeholders indicated that generic messages would foster self-efficacy to meet the Guidelines. Stakeholders expressed concerns about the inclusivity of the Guidelines for diverse socioeconomic groups.

BACKGROUND: There is a notable inequity in access to palliative care (PC) services between cancer and Chronic Heart Failure (CHF)/Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients which also translates into discrepancies in the level of integration of PC. By cross-examining the levels of PC integration in published guidelines/pathways for CHF/COPD and cancer in Europe, this study examines whether these discrepancies may be attributed to the content of the guidelines.
METHODS: A quantitative evaluation was made between integrated PC in published guidelines for cancer and CHF/COPD in Europe. The content of integrated PC in guidelines/pathways was measured using an 11 point integrated PC criteria tool (IPC criteria). A statistical analysis was carried out to detect similarities and differences in the level of integrated PC between the two groups.
RESULTS: The levels of integration between CHF/COPD and cancer guidelines/pathways have been shown to be statistically similar. Moreover, the quality of evidence utilized and the date of development of the guidelines/pathways appear not to impact upon the PC integration in the guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: In Europe, the empirically observed imbalance in integration of PC for patients with cancer and CHF/COPD may only partially be attributed to the content of the guidelines/pathways that are utilized for the PC implementation. Given the similarities detected between cancer and CHF/COPD, other barriers appear to play a more prominent role.