ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2017
Correlates of accelerometer-assessed physical activity and sedentary time among adults with type 2 diabetes.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Frequency of Interruptions to Sitting Time: Benefits for Postprandial Metabolism in Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes care · 2021Trial
- The Physical Activity Assessment of Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Using Accelerometer-Based Cut Points: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2022Article
- Energy Requirements for Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review of the Current Findings and Future Tasks.Nutrients · 2021Review
- Factors Associated with Objectively Measured Physical Activity in Patients with Seropositive Rheumatoid Arthritis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aims of this study were to describe the volume and patterns of objectively assessed sedentary behaviour, light intensity physical activity (LPA) and moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and to examine socio-demographic correlates, among adults living with type 2 diabetes.
methodsParticipants (n = 166) wore an accelerometer (Actigraph® GT3X+) for seven consecutive days during waking hours and completed a questionnaire. Physical activity (PA) and sedentary time were described, and multivariable linear regression was used to estimate associations between socio-demographic characteristics and sedentary time and PA.
resultsParticipants, 46% of whom were female, had a mean age of 65.4 years (standard deviation (SD) = 9.5), body mass index (BMI) of 31.5 (6.6) kg/m2 and had been living with diabetes for an average of 13.1 (7.6) years. Participants were sedentary for 543.6 minutes/day, spent 273.4 minutes/day and 22.4 minutes/day in LPA and MVPA respectively. BMI was associated with increased sedentary time and reduced LPA (-2.5 minutes/day, 95% CI: -4.33 to -0.70) and MVPA (-0.62 minutes/day, 95% CI: -1.05 to -0.18) time. Compared with males, females had more LPA (34.4 minutes/day, 95% CI: 10.21-58.49) and less MVPA (-6.2 minutes/day, 95% CI: -12.04 to -0.41) time. Unemployed participants had 30.05 minutes more MVPA (95% CI: 3.35-56.75) than those who were employed or homemakers, and those not reporting income had 13 minutes/day more MVPA time than participants in the lowest income category (95% CI: 3.46-22.40).
conclusionAdults living with type 2 diabetes were not sufficiently active and were highly sedentary. Our results emphasize the need for more research exploring the diabetes-related health outcomes of sedentary behaviour and physical inactivity among people living with type 2 diabetes.
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.