Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26605710›Full record

Trial reportPreventing chronic disease2015

A Randomized Controlled Trial Translating the Diabetes Prevention Program to a University Worksite, Ohio, 2012-2014.

Kellie R Weinhold, Carla K Miller, David G Marrero, Haikady N Nagaraja, Brian C Focht, Gregg M Gascon

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

Trial report in Preventing chronic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kellie R WeinholdThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Carla K MillerThe Ohio State University, 1787 Neil Ave, 325 Campbell Hall, Columbus, OH 43210. Email: miller.4453@osu.edu.
David G MarreroIndiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Haikady N NagarajaThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Brian C FochtThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
Gregg M GasconThe Ohio State University Health Plan, Inc, Columbus, Ohio.
The Ohio State University · USIndiana University School of Medicine

Funding

Evaluation of a Lifestyle Intervention for Employees with PrediabetesR34DK093907 · NIDDK · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI MILLER, CARLA K · 2012 to 2013
$464k
NIDDK NIH HHS R34 DK093907NIDDK NIH HHS R34DK093907
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWorking adults spend much time at the workplace, an ideal setting for wellness programs targeting weight loss and disease prevention. Few randomized trials have evaluated the efficacy of worksite diabetes prevention programs. This study evaluated the efficacy of a worksite lifestyle intervention on metabolic and behavioral risk factors compared with usual care.

methodsA pretest-posttest control group design with 3-month follow-up was used. Participants with prediabetes were recruited from a university worksite and randomized to receive a 16-week lifestyle intervention (n = 35) or usual care (n = 34). Participants were evaluated at baseline, postintervention, and 3-month follow-up. Dietary intake was measured by a food frequency questionnaire and level of physical activity by accelerometers. Repeated measures analysis of variance compared the change in outcomes between and within groups.

resultsMean (standard error [SE]) weight loss was greater in the intervention (-5.5% [0.6%]) than in the control (-0.4% [0.5%]) group (P < .001) postintervention and was sustained at 3-month follow-up (P < .001). Mean (SE) reductions in fasting glucose were greater in the intervention (-8.6 [1.6] mg/dL) than in the control (-3.7 [1.6] mg/dL) group (P = .02) postintervention; both groups had significant glucose reductions at 3-month follow-up (P < .001). In the intervention group, the intake of total energy and the percentage of energy from all fats, saturated fats, and trans fats decreased, and the intake of dietary fiber increased (all P < .01) postintervention.

conclusionThe worksite intervention improved metabolic and behavioral risk factors among employees with prediabetes. The long-term impact on diabetes prevention and program sustainability warrant further investigation.

Indexed as

Life StyleWeight LossWorkplaceAdultDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Feeding BehaviorFemaleGlucose Tolerance TestHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor ActivityOhioPrediabetic StateProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID26605710
PMCPMC4674443
OpenAlexW2180233251

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.