Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23855708›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2013

Developing a complex intervention for diet and activity behaviour change in obese pregnant women (the UPBEAT trial); assessment of behavioural change and process evaluation in a pilot randomised controlled trial.

Lucilla Poston, Annette L Briley, Suzanne Barr, Ruth Bell, Helen Croker, Kirstie Coxon, Holly N Essex, Claire Hunt, Louise Hayes, Louise M Howard and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
17.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 143 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
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

20 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Lucilla Poston
Annette L Briley
Suzanne Barr
Ruth Bell
Helen Croker
Kirstie Coxon
Holly N Essex
Claire Hunt
Louise Hayes
Louise M Howard
Nina Khazaezadeh
Tarja Kinnunen
Scott M Nelson
Eugene Oteng-Ntim
Stephen C Robson
Naveed Sattar
Paul T Seed
Jane Wardle
Thomas A B Sanders
Jane Sandall
King's College London · GBSt Thomas' Hospital · GBNewcastle University · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBKings Health Partners · GBTampere University · FIUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 14133Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/680Department of Health RP-PG-0407-10452Department of Health RTF/01/022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComplex interventions in obese pregnant women should be theoretically based, feasible and shown to demonstrate anticipated behavioural change prior to inception of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The aim was to determine if a) a complex intervention in obese pregnant women leads to anticipated changes in diet and physical activity behaviours, and b) to refine the intervention protocol through process evaluation of intervention fidelity.

methodsWe undertook a pilot RCT of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women, comparing routine antenatal care with an intervention to reduce dietary glycaemic load and saturated fat intake, and increase physical activity. Subjects included 183 obese pregnant women (mean BMI 36.3 kg/m2).

resultsCompared to women in the control arm, women in the intervention arm had a significant reduction in dietary glycaemic load (33 points, 95% CI -47 to -20), (p < 0.001) and saturated fat intake (-1.6% energy, 95% CI -2.8 to -0. 3) at 28 weeks' gestation. Objectively measured physical activity did not change. Physical discomfort and sustained barriers to physical activity were common at 28 weeks' gestation. Process evaluation identified barriers to recruitment, group attendance and compliance, leading to modification of intervention delivery.

conclusionsThis pilot trial of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women suggests greater potential for change in dietary intake than for change in physical activity, and through process evaluation illustrates the considerable advantage of performing an exploratory trial of a complex intervention in obese pregnant women before undertaking a large RCT.

trial registrationTRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN89971375.

Indexed as

Motor ActivityAccelerometryAdolescentAdultBehavior TherapyBody Mass IndexDiabetes, GestationalDiet TherapyExercise TherapyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansObesityPilot ProjectsPregnancyPregnancy Complications

Identifiers

PMID23855708
PMCPMC3718630
OpenAlexW2100658262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.