Trial reportPLoS medicine2017
Effect of a Primary Care Walking Intervention with and without Nurse Support on Physical Activity Levels in 45- to 75-Year-Olds: The Pedometer And Consultation Evaluation (PACE-UP) Cluster Randomised Clinical Trial.
Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 135 citations in OpenAlex.
- Wearable Activity Tracker-Based Interventions for Physical Activity, Body Composition, and Physical Function Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Do physical activity interventions combining self-monitoring with other components provide an additional benefit compared with self-monitoring alone? A systematic review and meta-analysis.British journal of sports medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of registered nurses on patient outcomes in primary care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of registered nurses on system outcomes in primary care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Promoting physical activity in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Pooled it
- The effects of step-count monitoring interventions on physical activity: systematic review and meta-analysis of community-based randomised controlled trials in adults.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- Effectiveness of a female community health volunteer-led physical activity education intervention on accelerometer-derived outcomes in semi-urban Nepal: an open-label, cluster randomised controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- A process evaluation, with mediation analysis, of a web-based intervention to augment primary care exercise referral schemes: the e-coachER randomised controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Trial
- Effects of a three-armed randomised controlled trial using self-monitoring of daily steps with and without counselling in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes-the Sophia Step Study.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021Trial
- Physical Activity Level Following Resistance Training in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Receiving Home Care: Results from a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Process evaluation of the Sophia Step Study- a primary care based three-armed randomized controlled trial using self-monitoring of steps with and without counseling in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of Minimal Contact Interventions: An RCT.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Trial
- Effectiveness of the nurse-led Activate intervention in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease in primary care: a cluster-randomised controlled trial.European journal of cardiovascular nursing · 2020Trial
- Effect of novel technology-enabled multidimensional physical activity feedback in primary care patients at risk of chronic disease - the MIPACT study: a randomised controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Trial
- Evaluation of a very brief pedometer-based physical activity intervention delivered in NHS Health Checks in England: The VBI randomised controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2020Trial
- Enhanced motivational interviewing for reducing weight and increasing physical activity in adults with high cardiovascular risk: the MOVE IT three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2019Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPedometers can increase walking and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) levels, but their effectiveness with or without support has not been rigorously evaluated. We assessed the effectiveness of a pedometer-based walking intervention in predominantly inactive adults, delivered by post or through primary care nurse-supported physical activity (PA) consultations. METHODS AND
findingsA parallel three-arm cluster randomised trial was randomised by household, with 12-mo follow-up, in seven London, United Kingdom, primary care practices. Eleven thousand fifteen randomly selected patients aged 45-75 y without PA contraindications were invited. Five hundred forty-eight self-reporting achieving PA guidelines were excluded. One thousand twenty-three people from 922 households were randomised between 2012-2013 to one of the following groups: usual care (n = 338); postal pedometer intervention (n = 339); and nurse-supported pedometer intervention (n = 346). Of these, 956 participants (93%) provided outcome data (usual care n = 323, postal n = 312, nurse-supported n = 321). Both intervention groups received pedometers, 12-wk walking programmes, and PA diaries. The nurse group was offered three PA consultations. Primary and main secondary outcomes were changes from baseline to 12 mo in average daily step-counts and time in MVPA (in ≥10-min bouts), respectively, measured objectively by accelerometry. Only statisticians were masked to group. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Average baseline daily step-count was 7,479 (standard deviation [s.d.] 2,671), and average time in MVPA bouts was 94 (s.d. 102) min/wk. At 12 mo, mean steps/d, with s.d. in parentheses, were as follows: control 7,246 (2,671); postal 8,010 (2,922); and nurse support 8,131 (3,228). PA increased in both intervention groups compared with the control group; additional steps/d were 642 for postal (95% CI 329-955) and 677 for nurse support (95% CI 365-989); additional MVPA in bouts (min/wk) were 33 for postal (95% CI 17-49) and 35 for nurse support (95% CI 19-51). There were no significant differences between the two interventions at 12 mo. The 10% (1,023/10,467) recruitment rate was a study limitation.
conclusionsA primary care pedometer-based walking intervention in predominantly inactive 45- to 75-y-olds increased step-counts by about one-tenth and time in MVPA in bouts by about one-third. Nurse and postal delivery achieved similar 12-mo PA outcomes. A primary care pedometer intervention delivered by post or with minimal support could help address the public health physical inactivity challenge. CLINICAL
trial registrationisrctn.com ISRCTN98538934.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.