Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35351726›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Protocol for the Let's Grow randomised controlled trial: examining efficacy, cost-effectiveness and scalability of a m-Health intervention for movement behaviours in toddlers.

Kylie D Hesketh, Katherine L Downing, Barbara C Galland, Jan M Nicholson, Rachael Taylor, Liliana Orellana, Mohamed Abdelrazek, Harriet Koorts, Victoria Brown, Jess Haines and 6 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Selection and reporting of usual care comparators when designing primary care trials of complex health interventions: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Tensions and Paradoxes of Scaling Up: A Critical Reflection on Physical Activity Promotion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  12. 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

16 authors.

Kylie D HeskethInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia kylie.hesketh@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2702-7110
Katherine L DowningInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6552-8506
Barbara C GallandDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-2376-3575
Jan M NicholsonJudith Lumley Centre, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Rachael TaylorDepartment of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Liliana OrellanaFaculty of Health Biostatistics Unit, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Mohamed AbdelrazekSchool of Information Technology, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia.
Harriet KoortsInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1303-6064
Victoria BrownDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2891-9476
Jess HainesDepartment of Family Relations and Applied Nutrition, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Karen J CampbellInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Lisa M BarnettInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Marie LöfInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Marj MoodieDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Valerie CarsonFaculty of Kinesiology, Sport, and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Jo SalmonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Deakin University Faculty of Health, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite being an important period for the development of movement behaviours (physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep), few interventions commencing prior to preschool have been trialled. The primary aim of this trial is to assess the 12-month efficacy of the METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised controlled trial will test the effects of the 12-month parental support mHealth intervention, ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Deakin University Human Ethics Committee (2020-077). Study findings will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, presentation at scientific and professional conferences, and via social and traditional media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001280998; U1111-1252-0599.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsTelemedicineChild, PreschoolCost-Benefit AnalysisExerciseHumansProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCommunity child healthPREVENTIVE MEDICINEPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID35351726
PMCPMC8961153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.