Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27898672›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2016

Lifestyle Advice Combined with Personalized Estimates of Genetic or Phenotypic Risk of Type 2 Diabetes, and Objectively Measured Physical Activity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Job G Godino, Esther M F van Sluijs, Theresa M Marteau, Stephen Sutton, Stephen J Sharp, Simon J Griffin

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03234322 (A Cluster Randomized Trial to Investigate the Impact of a Type 2 Diabetes Risk Prediction Model on Change in Physical Activity Within Routine Health Checks in Primary Care.), which is not on this map. Cited by 41 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT03234322 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

A Cluster Randomized Trial to Investigate the Impact of a Type 2 Diabetes Risk Prediction Model on Change in Physical Activity Within Routine Health Checks in Primary Care.

TypeinterventionalSponsorGerman Diabetes CenterRan2017 to 2021Enrolled315ConditionsType 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Primary PreventionArmsexternal validated risk prediction model
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Are There Any Effective Behavior Change Strategies for Communicating Genetic Risk in Obesity Prevention and Body Weight Reduction Interventions?Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Personalising dietary advice for disease prevention: concepts and experiences.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Job G GodinoMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4852-6277
Esther M F van SluijsMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Theresa M MarteauBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Public Health, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stephen SuttonBehavioural Science Group, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stephen J SharpMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2375-1440
Simon J GriffinMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2157-4797

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0606-1259Medical Research Council G0400634Medical Research Council G0500274Medical Research Council MC_U106179474
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformation about genetic and phenotypic risk of type 2 diabetes is now widely available and is being incorporated into disease prevention programs. Whether such information motivates behavior change or has adverse effects is uncertain. We examined the effect of communicating an estimate of genetic or phenotypic risk of type 2 diabetes in a parallel group, open, randomized controlled trial. METHODS AND

findingsWe recruited 569 healthy middle-aged adults from the Fenland Study, an ongoing population-based, observational study in the east of England (Cambridgeshire, UK). We used a computer-generated random list to assign participants in blocks of six to receive either standard lifestyle advice alone (control group, n = 190) or in combination with a genetic (n = 189) or a phenotypic (n = 190) risk estimate for type 2 diabetes (intervention groups). After 8 wk, we measured the primary outcome, objectively measured physical activity (kJ/kg/day), and also measured several secondary outcomes (including self-reported diet, self-reported weight, worry, anxiety, and perceived risk). The study was powered to detect a between-group difference of 4.1 kJ/kg/d at follow-up. 557 (98%) participants completed the trial. There were no significant intervention effects on physical activity (difference in adjusted mean change from baseline: genetic risk group versus control group 0.85 kJ/kg/d (95% CI -2.07 to 3.77, p = 0.57); phenotypic risk group versus control group 1.32 (95% CI -1.61 to 4.25, p = 0.38); and genetic risk group versus phenotypic risk group -0.47 (95% CI -3.40 to 2.46, p = 0.75). No significant differences in self-reported diet, self-reported weight, worry, and anxiety were observed between trial groups. Estimates of perceived risk were significantly more accurate among those who received risk information than among those who did not. Key limitations include the recruitment of a sample that may not be representative of the UK population, use of self-reported secondary outcome measures, and a short follow-up period.

conclusionsIn this study, we did not observe short-term changes in behavior associated with the communication of an estimate of genetic or phenotypic risk of type 2 diabetes. We also did not observe changes in worry or anxiety in the study population. Additional research is needed to investigate the conditions under which risk information might enhance preventive strategies. (Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN09650496; Date applied: April 4, 2011; Date assigned: June 10, 2011).

trial registrationThe trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN09650496.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth CommunicationLife StyleRiskAdultAnxietyBody WeightDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2DietEnglandFemaleHealth BehaviorHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf Report

Identifiers

PMID27898672
PMCPMC5127499

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.