Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29522529›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2018

Physical activity levels in adults and older adults 3-4 years after pedometer-based walking interventions: Long-term follow-up of participants from two randomised controlled trials in UK primary care.

Tess Harris, Sally M Kerry, Elizabeth S Limb, Cheryl Furness, Charlotte Wahlich, Christina R Victor, Steve Iliffe, Peter H Whincup, Michael Ussher, Ulf Ekelund and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Effectiveness of Minimal Contact Interventions: An RCT.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Tess HarrisPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8671-1553
Sally M KerryPragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Queen Mary's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7181-9107
Elizabeth S LimbPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0830-7376
Cheryl FurnessPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Charlotte WahlichPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Christina R VictorGerontology and Health Services Research Unit, Brunel University, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4213-3974
Steve IliffeResearch Department of Primary Care & Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Peter H WhincupPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Michael UssherPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0995-7955
Ulf EkelundDepartment of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.
Julia Fox-RushbyHealth Economics Research Group, Brunel, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Judith IbisonPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen DeWildePopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4238-4474
Cathy McKayPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Derek G CookPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9723-5759

Funding

Department of Health 10/32/02Department of Health PB-PG-0909-20055
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical inactivity is an important cause of noncommunicable diseases. Interventions can increase short-term physical activity (PA), but health benefits require maintenance. Few interventions have evaluated PA objectively beyond 12 months. We followed up two pedometer interventions with positive 12-month effects to examine objective PA levels at 3-4 years. METHODS AND

findingsLong-term follow-up of two completed trials: Pedometer And Consultation Evaluation-UP (PACE-UP) 3-arm (postal, nurse support, control) at 3 years and Pedometer Accelerometer Consultation Evaluation-Lift (PACE-Lift) 2-arm (nurse support, control) at 4 years post-baseline. Randomly selected patients from 10 United Kingdom primary care practices were recruited (PACE-UP: 45-75 years, PACE-Lift: 60-75 years). Intervention arms received 12-week walking programmes (pedometer, handbooks, PA diaries) postally (PACE-UP) or with nurse support (PACE-UP, PACE-Lift). Main outcomes were changes in 7-day accelerometer average daily step counts and weekly time in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) in ≥10-minute bouts in intervention versus control groups, between baseline and 3 years (PACE-UP) and 4 years (PACE-Lift). PACE-UP 3-year follow-up was 67% (681/1,023) (mean age: 59, 64% female), and PACE-Lift 4-year follow-up was 76% (225/298) (mean age: 67, 53% female). PACE-UP 3-year intervention versus control comparisons were as follows: additional steps/day postal +627 (95% CI: 198-1,056), p = 0.004, nurse +670 (95% CI: 237-1,102), p = 0.002; total weekly MVPA in bouts (minutes/week) postal +28 (95% CI: 7-49), p = 0.009, nurse +24 (95% CI: 3-45), p = 0.03. PACE-Lift 4-year intervention versus control comparisons were: +407 (95% CI: -177-992), p = 0.17 steps/day, and +32 (95% CI: 5-60), p = 0.02 minutes/week MVPA in bouts. Neither trial showed sedentary or wear-time differences. Main study limitation was incomplete follow-up; however, results were robust to missing data sensitivity analyses.

conclusionsIntervention participants followed up from both trials demonstrated higher levels of objectively measured PA at 3-4 years than controls, similar to previously reported 12-month trial effects. Pedometer interventions, delivered by post or with nurse support, can help address the public health physical inactivity challenge. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: PACE-UP isrctn.com ISRCTN98538934; PACE-Lift isrctn.com ISRCTN42122561.

Indexed as

ExerciseExercise TherapyNoncommunicable DiseasesWalkingAccelerometryActigraphyAftercareAgedFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursing CarePrimary Health CareProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID29522529
PMCPMC5844512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.