Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23157970›Full record

SynthesisPublic health nutrition2014

Strengthening the rigour of population-wide, community-based obesity prevention evaluations.

Luke Wolfenden, John Wiggers

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Public health nutrition, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of economic evidence for community-based obesity prevention interventions in children.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Evaluating Community-Based Health Improvement Programs.Health affairs (Project Hope) · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Luke Wolfenden1 School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.
John Wiggers1 School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the present study was to review the methodological literature regarding evaluation methods for complex public health interventions broadly and, based on such methods, to critically reflect on the evaluation of contemporary community-based obesity prevention programmes.

designA systematic review of the methods and community-based literature was performed by one reviewer.

resultsThe review identified that there is considerable scope to improve the rigour of community-based obesity prevention programmes through: prospective trial registration; the use of more rigorous research designs, particularly where routine databases including an objective measure of adiposity are available; implementing strategies to quantify and reduce the risk of selective non-participation bias; the development and use of validated instruments to assess intervention impacts; reporting of intervention process and context information; and more comprehensive analyses of trial outcomes.

conclusionsTo maximise the quality and utility of community-based obesity prevention evaluations, programme implementers and evaluators need to carefully examine the strengths and pitfalls of evaluation decisions and seek to maximise evaluation rigour in the context of political, resource and practical constraints.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorBody WeightHealth PromotionHumansMotor ActivityObesityPublic HealthRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResidence CharacteristicsSedentary Behavior

Identifiers

PMID23157970
PMCPMC10282234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.