Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32441659›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2020

Investigating the Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness of Technology-Delivered Personalized Feedback on Dietary Patterns in Young Australian Adults in the Advice, Ideas, and Motivation for My Eating (Aim4Me) Study: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Rebecca L Haslam, Kristine Pezdirc, Helen Truby, John Attia, Melinda Hutchesson, Tracy Burrows, Robin Callister, Leanne Hides, Billie Bonevski, Deborah A Kerr and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Rebecca L Haslam *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5800-734X
Kristine PezdircFaculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, North Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0726-7942
Helen Truby *Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1992-1649
John Attia *School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9800-1308
Melinda Hutchesson *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1851-0661
Tracy Burrows *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1431-7864
Robin Callister *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5592-6132
Leanne Hides *School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4550-8460
Billie Bonevski *School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8505-622X
Deborah A Kerr *School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin Institute of Technology, Perth, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1094-1299
David Lubans *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Education, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0204-8257
Sharon Kirkpatrick *School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9896-5975
Megan Rollo *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1303-2063
Tracy McCaffrey *Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9699-3083
Clare E Collins *Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3298-756X
University of Newcastle Australia · AUMonash University · AUCurtin University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Waterloo · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeb-based health interventions may be easier to access and time efficient relative to face-to-face interventions and therefore may be the most appropriate mode to engage young adults.

objectiveThis study aims to investigate the impact of 3 different levels of personalized web-based dietary feedback and support on changes in diet quality.

methodsThe Advice, Ideas, and Motivation for My Eating (Aim4Me) study is a 12-month assessor-blinded, parallel-group randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of 3 levels of web-based feedback on diet quality, measured using the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS). Participants (N=2570) will primarily be recruited via web-based methods and randomized to 1 of 3 groups. Group 1 (control) will receive the Healthy Eating Quiz, a web-based dietary assessment tool that generates a brief feedback report on diet quality. Individuals randomized to this group can use the brief feedback report to make positive dietary changes. Group 2 will receive the Australian Eating Survey, a web-based dietary assessment tool that generates a comprehensive feedback report on diet quality as well as macro- and micronutrient intake. Group 2 will use the comprehensive feedback report to assist in making positive dietary changes. They will also have access to the Aim4Me website with resources on healthy eating and tools to set goals and self-monitor progress. Group 3 will receive the same intervention as Group 2 (ie, the comprehensive feedback report) in addition to a tailored 30-min video consultation with an accredited practicing dietitian who will use the comprehensive feedback report to assist individuals in making positive dietary changes. The self-determination theory was used as the framework for selecting appropriate website features, including goal setting and self-monitoring. The primary outcome measure is change in diet quality. The completion of questionnaires at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months will be incentivized with a monetary prize draw.

resultsAs of December 2019, 1277 participants have been randomized.

conclusionsThe web-based delivery of nutrition interventions has the potential to improve dietary intake of young adults. However, the level of support required to improve intake is unknown.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000325202; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=374420. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/15999.

Indexed as

dietdietary feedbackeHealthnutritionweb-basedyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID32441659
PMCPMC7275255
OpenAlexW3021317555

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.