Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31596494›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2019

Accelerometer- and Pedometer-Based Physical Activity Interventions Among Adults With Cardiometabolic Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Alexander Hodkinson, Evangelos Kontopantelis, Charles Adeniji, Harm van Marwijk, Brian McMillan, Peter Bower, Maria Panagioti

RetractedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alexander HodkinsonNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Evangelos KontopantelisNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Charles AdenijiNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Harm van MarwijkDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Brighton, United Kingdom.
Brian McMillanNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Peter BowerNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Maria PanagiotiNational Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBBrighton and Sussex Medical School · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Accelerometers and pedometers are accessible technologies that could have a role in encouraging physical activity (PA) in line with current recommendations. However, there is no solid evidence of their association with PA in participants with 1 or more cardiometabolic conditions such as diabetes, prediabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Objectives: To assess the association of accelerometer- and pedometer-based interventions with increased activity and other improved health outcomes in adults with cardiometabolic conditions and to examine characteristics of the studies that could influence the association of both interventions in improving PA. Data Sources: Records from MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and PsycINFO were searched from inception until August 2018 with no language restriction. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials or cluster randomized clinical trials evaluating the use of wearable technology devices such as pedometers and accelerometers as motivating and monitoring tools for increasing PA were included. After removing duplicates, the searches retrieved 5762 references. Following abstract and title screening of 1439 references and full-text screening of 107 studies, 36 studies met inclusion criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Mean difference in PA was assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. Where the scale was different across studies, the standardized mean difference was used instead. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic and explored using mixed-effects metaregression. This study was registered with PROSPERO and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was objectively measured PA in the short to medium term (postintervention to 8 months' follow-up). Results: Thirty-six randomized clinical trials (20 using accelerometers and 16 using pedometers) involving 5208 participants were eligible for review. Meta-analysis involving 32 of these trials (4856 participants) showed medium improvements in PA: accelerometers and pedometers combined vs comparator showed a small significant increase in PA overall (standardized mean difference, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.28-0.51]; I2 = 60% [95% CI, 41%-73%]) in studies of short to medium follow-up over a mean (SD) of 32 (28.6) weeks. Multivariable metaregression showed improved association with PA for complex interventions that involved face-to-face consultation sessions with facilitators (β = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17-0.55; P < .001) and pedometer-based interventions (β = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.08-0.52; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, complex accelerometer- and pedometer-based interventions led to significant small to medium improvements in PA levels of people with cardiometabolic conditions. However, longer-term trials are needed to assess their performance over time. This study found no evidence that simple self-monitored interventions using either pedometers or accelerometers are associated with improvements in PA.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorAccelerometryCardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ExerciseHumansProfessional-Patient RelationsWearable Electronic Devices

Identifiers

PMID31596494
PMCPMC6802237
OpenAlexW2980252214

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.