Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33715618›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

Response to 'Systematic reviews do not always capture context of real-world intervention programmes for childhood obesity' by Wild et al., 2021 in BMC Public Health.

Robyn Littlewood, Oliver J Canfell, Jacqueline L Walker

Abstract readLetterComment
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Robyn LittlewoodHealth and Wellbeing Queensland, Queensland Government, The State of Queensland, Milton, QLD, Australia.
Oliver J CanfellCentre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, 4006, Australia. o.canfell@uq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2010-3640
Jacqueline L WalkerSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a correspondence to BMC Public Health, Wild et al. respond to our systematic review that synthesised results of interventions to prevent or treat childhood obesity in Māori and Pacific Islanders. Our review included the Whānau Pakari study as one of six included studies - a multidisciplinary intervention for Māori children and adolescents living with obesity led by their research team. Our review suggested that future research can incorporate stronger co-design principles when designing culturally-tailored interventions to maximise cultural specificity, enhance engagement, facilitate program ownership and contribute to improved health and weight-related outcomes. We commend Whānau Pakari and the team of Wild et al. on their sustained commitment to addressing obesity in priority populations and agree that systematic reviews struggle to capture real-world context of interventions for complex diseases such as obesity. In this article, we respond sequentially to the comments made by Wild et al. and (1) clarify the scope of our review article (2) reiterate our commendation of mixed-methods approaches that capture real-world context (3) explain a referencing error that caused a misinterpretation of our results (4) clarify our interpretation of some Whānau Pakari characteristics (5) welcome partnership to facilitate shared learning with Wild et al.

Indexed as

Pediatric ObesityAdolescentBody WeightChildHumansLearningSystematic Reviews as TopicAdolescentChildInterventionObesityOceanic ancestry groupSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33715618
PMCPMC7958423

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.