Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26500186›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2015

Twitter-Delivered Behavioral Weight-Loss Interventions: A Pilot Series.

Sherry L Pagoto, Molly E Waring, Kristin L Schneider, Jessica L Oleski, Effie Olendzki, Rashelle B Hayes, Bradley M Appelhans, Matthew C Whited, Andrew M Busch, Stephenie C Lemon

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03961061 (Increased Monitoring of Physical Activity and Calories With Technology), which is not on this map. Cited by 38 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

NCT03961061 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Increased Monitoring of Physical Activity and Calories With Technology

TypeinterventionalSponsorWake Forest University Health SciencesRan2020 to 2022Enrolled28ConditionsWeight Change, Body, Behavior, Health, Obesity, Childhood, Parent-Child RelationsArmsBrenner mFIT (standard care), Brenner mFIT (standard care plus mobile health components)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

10 authors.

Sherry L PagotoDivision of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, United States. Sherry.Pagoto@umassmed.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2462-8797

Funding

TRACE-COREU01HL105268 · NHLBI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI KIEFE, CATARINA I. · 2010 to 2013
$5.8M
University of Massachusetts Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceKL2TR000160 · NCATS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI LUZURIAGA, KATHERINE F · 2012 to 2014
$1.7M
Mentoring in mHealth and Social Networking Interventions for CVD Risk ReductionK24HL124366 · NHLBI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI PAGOTO, SHERRY L. · 2015 to 2024
$1.1M
Depression treatment and risk for cardiovascular diseaseK23HL109620 · NHLBI · EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY · PI WHITED, MATTHEW CHARLES · 2012 to 2016
$646k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000160NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL109620NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL124366NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL105268
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLifestyle interventions are efficacious at reducing risk for diabetes and cardiovascular disease but have not had a significant public health impact given high cost and patient and provider burden.

objectiveOnline social networks may reduce the burden of lifestyle interventions to the extent that they displace in-person visits and may enhance opportunities for social support for weight loss.

methodsWe conducted an iterative series of pilot studies to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of using online social networks to deliver a lifestyle intervention.

resultsIn Study 1 (n=10), obese participants with depression received lifestyle counseling via 12 weekly group visits and a private group formed using the online social network, Twitter. Mean weight loss was 2.3 pounds (SD 7.7; range -19.2 to 8.2) or 1.2% (SD 3.6) of baseline weight. A total of 67% (6/9) of participants completing exit interviews found the support of the Twitter group at least somewhat useful. In Study 2 (n=11), participants were not depressed and were required to be regular users of social media. Participants lost, on average, 5.6 pounds (SD 6.3; range -15 to 0) or 3.0% (SD 3.4) of baseline weight, and 100% (9/9) completing exit interviews found the support of the Twitter group at least somewhat useful. To explore the feasibility of eliminating in-person visits, in Study 3 (n=12), we delivered a 12-week lifestyle intervention almost entirely via Twitter by limiting the number of group visits to one, while using the same inclusion criteria as that used in Study 2. Participants lost, on average, 5.4 pounds (SD 6.4; range -14.2 to 3.9) or 3.0% (SD 3.1) of baseline weight, and 90% (9/10) completing exit interviews found the support of the Twitter group at least somewhat useful. Findings revealed that a private Twitter weight-loss group was both feasible and acceptable for many patients, particularly among regular users of social media.

conclusionsFuture research should evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of online social network-delivered lifestyle interventions relative to traditional modalities.

Indexed as

digital healthobesityonline social networkingpeer-to-peer health caresocial networksTwitterweight loss

Identifiers

PMID26500186
PMCPMC4704936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.