Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2012
An exercise trial for wheelchair users: project workout on wheels.
Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Face-to-face interventions for promoting physical activity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Face-to-face versus remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Exercise for everyone: a randomized controlled trial of project workout on wheels in promoting exercise among wheelchair users.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2014Trial
- A Scoping Review of Self-Management Interventions Following Spinal Cord Injury.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2020Article
- Mixed-reality exercise effects on participation of individuals with spinal cord injuries and developmental disabilities: a pilot study.Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2014Article
- Remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is growing interest in promoting health for people with disabilities, yet evidence regarding community-based interventions is sparse. This paper describes the design details of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that will test the effectiveness of a multi-component behaviorally based, intervention to promote exercise adoption (over 6 months) and maintenance (up to one year) among wheelchair users and includes descriptive data on participant characteristics at baseline. Participants were randomly assigned to either a staff-supported intervention group or a self-guided comparison group. The primary study aim is to assess the effectiveness of the multi-component behaviorally based intervention for promoting physical activity adoption and maintenance. The RCT will also assess the physical and psychosocial effects of the intervention and the complex interplay of factors that influence the effectiveness of the intervention. Therefore, the primary outcome derives from participant reports of weekly exercise (type, frequency, duration) over 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes collected on four occasions (baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months) included physiological outcomes (VO(2) peak, strength), disability-related outcomes (pain, fatigue, participation), and psychosocial outcomes (exercise self-efficacy, exercise barriers, quality of life, depression, mood). This study will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of a multi-component behaviorally based intervention for promoting exercise adoption among people with mobility impairments that necessitate wheelchair use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.