Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28529971›Full record

ArticleTranslational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine2016

A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Three Walking Self-monitoring Strategies.

Caroline R Richardson, David E Goodrich, Angela R Larkin, David Ronis, Robert G Holleman, Laura J Damschroder, Julie C Lowery

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 72% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Caroline R RichardsonVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
David E GoodrichVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
Angela R LarkinVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
David RonisVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
Robert G HollemanVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
Laura J DamschroderVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
Julie C LoweryVA Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI.
VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System · USCreative Commons · USMichigan Medicine · US

Funding

Regional Pilot And Feasibility Study Grants ProgramP30DK020572 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Mehboob A Hussain · 2013 to 2026
$24.3M
Motivational Feedback to Increase Walking AdherenceK23HL075098 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI RICHARDSON, CAROLINE R. · 2004 to 2008
$666k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL075098NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK020572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWalking programs improve health outcomes in adults at risk for cardiovascular disease and self-monitoring strategies can improve adherence to such programs. The objective of this study was to determine if a six-month internet-based walking program using web-enhanced pedometers results in more weight loss than walking programs based on time or simple pedometer-step count goals in adults with or at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD).

methodsThis was a multi-site, randomized controlled trial of 255 male Veterans who were ambulatory, insufficiently active, BMI ≥ 28, and who reported 1 ≥ CVD risk factors. Participants were randomized to one of three self-monitoring strategies to increase walking: (1) time-based walking goals; (2) simple pedometer-based walking goals; and (3) web-enhanced pedometer feedback goals with Internet-mediated feedback. All participants also attended five individual weight loss sessions with a dietitian. The main outcome measure was change in weight at six months (kg) and secondary outcomes were change in accelerometer-measured physical activity (min) and change in health-related quality of life at six months.

resultsThe 255 participants had a mean age of 56.3 years (SD = 10.0), BMI=36.3 (SD = 5.3) with a mean of 5.2 (SD = 2.3) medical comorbidities. Dropouts were distributed evenly across the three groups and 72% of participants completed the program. At six months, participants in the web-enhanced pedometer arm lost significantly more weight (-1.9 kg, 95% CI=-2.7, -1.1) than those in the time-based group (-0.7 kg, 95% CI=-1.5, 0.0; p = 0.04) and simple pedometer group (-0.6 kg, 95% CI=-1.4, 0.2; p = 0.02).

conclusionInternet-enhanced pedometers result in greater weight loss in Veterans than walking programs using time-based walking goals or simple pedometers.

Indexed as

nutritional counselingobesitypedometerphysical activity counselingwalking programweight loss

Identifiers

PMID28529971
PMCPMC5435380
OpenAlexW2978277270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.