Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28625540›Full record

Trial reportJournal of science and medicine in sport2018

Effects of breaking up sitting on adolescents' postprandial glucose after consuming meals varying in energy: a cross-over randomised trial.

Elly A Fletcher, Jo Salmon, Sarah A McNaughton, Liliana Orellana, Glenn D Wadley, Clinton Bruce, Paddy C Dempsey, Kathleen E Lacy, David W Dunstan

Abstract readPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of science and medicine in sport, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Elly A FletcherDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia. Electronic address: elly.fletcher@deakin.edu.au.
Jo SalmonDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia.
Sarah A McNaughtonDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia.
Liliana OrellanaDeakin University, Biostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Australia.
Glenn D WadleyDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia.
Clinton BruceDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia.
Paddy C DempseyBaker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Australia; Swinburne University of Technology, Australia.
Kathleen E LacyDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia.
David W DunstanDeakin University, Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Australia; Swinburne University of Technology, Australia; Monash University, Department of Medicine, Australia; The University of Queensland, School of Public Health, Australia; Monash University, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Australia; The University of Western Australia, School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health, Australia; Australian Catholic University, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore the impact of uninterrupted sitting versus sitting with resistance-type activity breaks on adolescents' postprandial glucose responses while consuming a diet varying in energy.

designCross-over randomised trial.

methodsThirteen healthy participants (16.4±1.3years) completed a four-treatment cross-over trial: (1) uninterrupted sitting+high-energy diet; (2) sitting with breaks+high-energy diet; (3) uninterrupted sitting+standard-energy diet; and (4) sitting with breaks+standard-energy diet. For all four conditions, two identical meals were consumed; at 0h and 3h. A continuous glucose monitoring system (CGM) recorded interstitial glucose concentrations every five minutes. Linear mixed models examined differences in glucose positive incremental area under the curve (iAUC) and total AUC between the sitting and diet conditions for the first meal, second meal and entire trial period.

resultsCompared to the uninterrupted sitting conditions, the breaks condition elicited a 36.0mmol/L/h (95%CI 6.6-65.5) and 35.9mmol/L/h (95%CI 6.6-65.5) lower iAUC response after the first and second meal, respectively, but not for the entire trial period or for total AUC. Compared to the standard-energy diet, the high-energy diet elicited a 55.0mmol/L/h (95%CI 25.8-84.2) and 75.7mmol/L/h (95%CI 8.6-142.7) higher iAUC response after the first meal and entire trial, respectively. Similar response to the high-energy diet were observed for total AUC.

conclusionsAccording to iAUC, interrupting sitting had a significant effect on lowering postprandial glucose for both dietary conditions, however, it was not significant when examining total AUC. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12615001145594.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingSedentary BehaviorAdolescentArea Under CurveAthletic InjuriesBlood GlucoseCross-Over StudiesEnergy IntakeFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMalePostprandial PeriodPostureTime FactorsBlood GlucoseAdolescentsBlood glucoseContinuous glucose monitorDietSedentary lifestyle

Identifiers

PMID28625540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.