Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34476890›Full record

ArticleObesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity2021

E-&mHealth interventions targeting nutrition, physical activity, sedentary behavior, and/or obesity among children: A scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Chelsea L Kracht, Melinda Hutchesson, Mavra Ahmed, Andre Matthias Müller, Lee M Ashton, Hannah M Brown, Ann DeSmet, Carol A Maher, Chelsea E Mauch, Corneel Vandelanotte and 4 more

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

14 authors.

Chelsea L KrachtPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5467-0849
Melinda HutchessonSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1851-0661
Mavra AhmedDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Joannah and Brian Lawson Centre for Child Nutrition, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Andre Matthias MüllerSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-5770-6723
Lee M AshtonSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Hannah M BrownHunter New England Population Health, Newcastle, Australia.
Ann DeSmetFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Carol A MaherAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity (ARENA), Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Chelsea E MauchCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1419-7417
Corneel VandelanottePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.
Zenong YinDepartment of Public Health, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Megan WhatnallSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Camille E ShortMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences and Melbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.
Amanda E StaianoPennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7846-046X

Funding

Tracking & Evaluation CoreU54GM104940 · NIGMS · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI Peter Todd Katzmarzyk · 2012 to 2026
$69.1M
Training in Obesity ResearchT32DK064584 · NIDDK · LSU PENNINGTON BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH CTR · PI CORBY K MARTIN, Christopher D Morrison · 2003 to 2026
$5.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK064584NIGMS NIH HHS U54 GM104940
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Childhood obesity is a public health concern. Electronic and mobile health (e-&mHealth) approaches can facilitate the delivery of interventions for obesity prevention and treatment. Synthesizing reviews of e-&mHealth interventions to improve weight and weight-related behaviors (physical activity, sedentary behavior, and diet) is useful to characterize the current scope of the literature and identify opportunities for future reviews and studies. Using a scoping review methodology, we aimed to evaluate the breadth and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of e-&mHealth interventions targeting weight and weight-related behaviors in children and adolescents aged <19 years. A systematic search of seven databases was conducted, including reviews published between 2000 and 2019. Review characteristics were extracted, and methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Forty-five systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. All reviews evaluated intervention efficacy (100%), but few assessed other aspects (20% in total) such as cost-effectiveness. Smartphone applications (47%), text messages (44%), and websites (35%) were the main modalities. Weight (60%), physical activity (51%), and diet (44%) were frequently assessed, unlike sedentary behavior (8%). Most reviews were rated as having critically low or low methodological quality (97%). Reviews that identify the effective active ingredients of interventions and explore metrics beyond efficacy are recommended.

Indexed as

Pediatric ObesityTelemedicineAdolescentChildExerciseHumansSedentary BehaviorSystematic Reviews as Topicexercisenutritionsmartphonetechnology

Identifiers

PMID34476890
PMCPMC8865754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.