Trial reportPloS one2022
Validity of muscular fitness self-assessments in the ecofit smartphone application: A correlation study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- mHealth to support resistance training using outdoor gyms: the ecofit hybrid type 3 implementation-effectiveness trial.Translational behavioral medicine · 2026Trial
- The effects of fitness self-testing with instant feedback on changes in health-related fitness among Chinese male college students.PloS one · 2026Article
- Validity of self-assessment tools for cardiovascular risk behaviors: A systematic review.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Review
- Increasing participation in resistance training using outdoor gyms: A study protocol for the ecofit type III hybrid effectiveness implementation trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobile app-based interventions have the potential for wide-reach and therefore may be a useful tool in up-scaling physical activity interventions. In larger-scale interventions, face-to-face assessments are less cost-effective, and researchers often rely on surveys or activity trackers to assess outcomes. However, there is limited evidence of valid muscular fitness assessments that can be self-administered within mHealth interventions. As such, this study will evaluate the concurrent validity of upper and lower body muscular fitness that have been independently assessed by participants via the ecofit app, and face-to-face assessments conducted by a trained researcher.
methodsThis study compared baseline data from two muscular fitness tests from the ecofit two-armed randomised controlled trial and self-assessed data collected via the ecofit smartphone app (i.e., validated 90-degree push-up and 60-second sit-to-stand test). To assess the concurrent validity, the self-assessed push-up and sit-to-stand tests (i.e., collected via the ecofit app) were correlated using Spearman's correlation coefficient against the researcher-assessed results (i.e., objective results collected during baseline assessment for the ecofit trial). Bland-Altman plots were also used to allow visualisation of the differences between the self- and research-assessed tests.
resultsParticipants (N = 54) completed the push-up (24.1%) and sit-to-stand (100%) tests within 14-days of receiving the app. The results revealed a strong significant correlation for the push-up test (0.83, p<0.001) and a moderate significant correlation for the sit-to-stand test (0.63, p<0.001).
conclusionThis study provides support for the concurrent validity of self-reported upper and lower body muscular fitness assessments (i.e., the push-up and sit-to-stand tests) in mHealth. While these tests may be a feasible option for large scale physical activity interventions, more research is needed to determine the generalisability of these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.