Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24304838›Full record

Trial reportTrials2013

PACE-UP (Pedometer and consultation evaluation--UP)--a pedometer-based walking intervention with and without practice nurse support in primary care patients aged 45-75 years: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Tess Harris, Sally M Kerry, Christina R Victor, Sunil M Shah, Steve Iliffe, Michael Ussher, Ulf Ekelund, Julia Fox-Rushby, Peter Whincup, Lee David and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

19 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Tess HarrisGerontology and Health Services Research Unit, Brunel University, London UB8 3PH, UK. christina.victor@brunel.ac.uk.
Sally M Kerry
Christina R Victor
Sunil M Shah
Steve Iliffe
Michael Ussher
Ulf Ekelund
Julia Fox-Rushby
Peter Whincup
Lee David
Debbie Brewin
Judith Ibison
Stephen DeWilde
Elizabeth Limb
Nana Anokye
Cheryl Furness
Emma Howard
Rebecca Dale
Derek G Cook
St George's, University of London · GBBrunel University of London · GBMRC Epidemiology Unit · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health 10/32/02Medical Research Council MC_U106179473Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost adults do not achieve the 150 minutes weekly of at least moderate intensity activity recommended for health. Adults' most common physical activity (PA) is walking, light intensity if strolling, moderate if brisker. Pedometers can increase walking; however, most trials have been short-term, have combined pedometer and support effects, and have not reported PA intensity. This trial will investigate whether pedometers, with or without nurse support, can help less active 45-75 year olds to increase their PA over 12 months. METHODS/

design

designPrimary care-based 3-arm randomized controlled trial with 12-month follow-up and health economic and qualitative evaluations.

participantsLess active 45-75 year olds (n = 993) will be recruited by post from six South West London general practices, maximum of two per household and households randomised into three groups. Step-count and time spent at different PA intensities will be assessed for 7 days at baseline, 3 and 12 months by accelerometer. Questionnaires and anthropometric assessments will be completed.

interventionThe pedometer-alone group will be posted a pedometer (Yamax Digi-Walker SW-200), handbook and diary detailing a 12-week pedometer-based walking programme, using targets from their baseline assessment. The pedometer-plus-support group will additionally receive three practice nurse PA consultations. The handbook, diary and consultations include behaviour change techniques (e.g., self-monitoring, goal-setting, relapse prevention planning). The control group will receive usual care. OUTCOMES: Changes in average daily step-count (primary outcome), time spent sedentary and in at least moderate intensity PA weekly at 12 months, measured by accelerometry. Other outcomes include change in body mass index, body fat, self-reported PA, quality of life, mood and adverse events. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed by the incremental cost of the intervention to the National Health Service and incremental cost per change in step-count and per quality adjusted life year. Qualitative evaluations will explore reasons for trial non-participation and the interventions' acceptability. DISCUSSION: The PACE-UP trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pedometer-based walking intervention delivered by post or practice nurse to less active primary care patients aged 45-75 years old. Approaches to minimise bias and challenges anticipated in delivery will be discussed.

trial registrationISRCTN98538934.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsPrimary Health CareWalkingAgedHumansMiddle AgedNursesOutcome Assessment, Health CareReferral and ConsultationResearch DesignSample Size

Identifiers

PMID24304838
PMCPMC4235020
OpenAlexW2142321784

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.