Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28966555›Full record

ArticlePsychology of sport and exercise2017

The Impact of E-diaries and Accelerometers on Young Adults' Perceived and Objectively Assessed Physical Activity.

Miriam H Eisenberg, L Alison Phillips, Lauren Fowler, Philip J Moore

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology of sport and exercise, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03526172 (Assessing Physical Activity Levels of Patients Following High Tibial Osteotomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 6 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.

NCT03526172 terminatednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Assessing Physical Activity Levels of Patients Following High Tibial Osteotomy (HTO) With and Without Bone Grafting.

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of WinchesterRan2019 to 2020Enrolled10ConditionsHigh Tibial Osteotomy With Allograft Wedge, High Tibial Osteotomy Without Allograft Wedge, Pre- and Post-operative Physical Activity LevelsArmsHigh tibial osteotomy, Allograft wedge, Accelerometer, Questionnaire
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

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

4 authors.

Miriam H EisenbergHealth Behavior Branch, Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD.
L Alison PhillipsIowa State University, Department of Psychology, Ames, Iowa.
Lauren FowlerThe George Washington University, Department of Psychology, Washington, DC.
Philip J MooreThe George Washington University, Department of Psychology, Washington, DC.

Funding

Intramural NIH HHS Z99 HD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveE-diaries and accelerometers promise more objective, real-time measurements of health behavior. However, social-psychological theory suggests that using electronic behavioral monitoring may influence rather than just record physical activity (PA), especially when a device is novel.

designParticipants (n=146) were randomly assigned to either an accelerometer-only, e-diary-only, accelerometer+e-diary, or a no-technology control group for one week to assess how these technologies influenced PA, both perceived and actual, in young adults.

methodParticipants reported their PA, overall and number of discrete exercise sessions (DES) at baseline and follow-up; accelerometers provided daily step counts and e-diaries captured daily reports of PA for the active week of the study.

resultsAverage daily steps in the accelerometer-only and accelerometer+e-diary groups did not differ nor did daily reports of PA via e-diary compared to accelerometer+e-diary group, showing that neither technology affected actual PA. ANCOVAS tested group differences in perceived PA; The accelerometer-only group had increased perceived overall PA but not DES compared to no-technology control.

conclusionsAccelerometers may increase perceived overall PA, but the tested technologies did not increase DES or actual PA, suggesting that they may be viable unbiased measures of PA.

Identifiers

PMID28966555
PMCPMC5619258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.