Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35552166›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2022

The Effectiveness of a Computer-Tailored Web-Based Physical Activity Intervention Using Fitbit Activity Trackers in Older Adults (Active for Life): Randomized Controlled Trial.

Stephanie J Alley, Jannique van Uffelen, Stephanie Schoeppe, Lynne Parkinson, Susan Hunt, Deborah Power, Natasha Waterman, Courtney Waterman, Quyen G To, Mitch J Duncan and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
6.1field-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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Efficacy of activity tracker-based interventions and their behavioral components in promoting physical activity and reducing sedentary behavior in older adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Stephanie J AlleyPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9666-5071
Jannique van UffelenDepartment of Movement Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7253-5766
Stephanie SchoeppePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1937-876X
Lynne ParkinsonSchool of Medicine & Public Health, College of Health, Medicine, and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9433-9555
Susan HuntSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Sciences, Central Queensland University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1575-7930
Deborah PowerPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5696-1973
Natasha WatermanPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5176-2721
Courtney WatermanPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0221-8164
Quyen G ToPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3355-6326
Mitch J DuncanSchool of Medicine & Public Health, College of Health, Medicine, and Wellbeing, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9166-6195
Anthony SchneidersPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1583-3879
Corneel VandelanottePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4445-8094
Central Queensland University · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AUKU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical activity is an integral part of healthy aging; yet, most adults aged ≥65 years are not sufficiently active. Preliminary evidence suggests that web-based interventions with computer-tailored advice and Fitbit activity trackers may be well suited for older adults.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of Active for Life, a 12-week web-based physical activity intervention with 6 web-based modules of computer-tailored advice to increase physical activity in older Australians.

methodsParticipants were recruited both through the web and offline and were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 trial arms: tailoring+Fitbit, tailoring only, or a wait-list control. The computer-tailored advice was based on either participants' Fitbit data (tailoring+Fitbit participants) or self-reported physical activity (tailoring-only participants). The main outcome was change in wrist-worn accelerometer (ActiGraph GT9X)-measured moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) from baseline to after the intervention (week 12). The secondary outcomes were change in self-reported physical activity measured by means of the Active Australia Survey at the midintervention point (6 weeks), after the intervention (week 12), and at follow-up (week 24). Participants had a face-to-face meeting at baseline for a demonstration of the intervention and at baseline and week 12 to return the accelerometers. Generalized linear mixed model analyses were conducted with a γ distribution and log link to compare MVPA and self-reported physical activity changes over time within each trial arm and between each of the trial arms.

resultsA total of 243 participants were randomly assigned to tailoring+Fitbit (n=78, 32.1%), tailoring only (n=96, 39.5%), and wait-list control (n=69, 28.4%). Attrition was 28.8% (70/243) at 6 weeks, 31.7% (77/243) at 12 weeks, and 35.4% (86/243) at 24 weeks. No significant overall time by group interaction was observed for MVPA (P=.05). There were no significant within-group changes for MVPA over time in the tailoring+Fitbit group (+3%, 95% CI -24% to 40%) or the tailoring-only group (-4%, 95% CI -24% to 30%); however, a significant decline was seen in the control group (-35%, 95% CI -52% to -11%). The tailoring+Fitbit group participants increased their MVPA 59% (95% CI 6%-138%) more than those in the control group. A significant time by group interaction was observed for self-reported physical activity (P=.02). All groups increased their self-reported physical activity from baseline to week 6, week 12, and week 24, and this increase was greater in the tailoring+Fitbit group than in the control group at 6 weeks (+61%, 95% CI 11%-133%).

conclusionsA computer-tailored physical activity intervention with Fitbit integration resulted in improved MVPA outcomes in comparison with a control group in older adults.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000646246; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12618000646246.

Indexed as

Fitness TrackersInternet-Based InterventionAgedAustraliaComputersExerciseHumansInternetactivity monitorsactivity trackersinternetmobile phoneonlinephysical activitywearables

Identifiers

PMID35552166
PMCPMC9136649
OpenAlexW4280605207

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.