Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36673756›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Rodney P Joseph, Michael Todd, Barbara E Ainsworth, Sonia Vega-López, Marc A Adams, Kevin Hollingshead, Steven P Hooker, Glenn A Gaesser, Colleen Keller

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
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

9 authors.

Rodney P JosephCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, 500 N 3rd St., Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Michael ToddCollege of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, 500 N 3rd St., Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1981-4245
Barbara E AinsworthSchool of Kinesiology, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China.
Sonia Vega-LópezCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8089-0725
Marc A AdamsCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Kevin HollingsheadCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
Steven P HookerCollege of Health and Human Services, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182, USA.
Glenn A GaesserCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5127-5336
Colleen KellerCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation, Arizona State University, 500 N 3rd St., Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.

Funding

Smart Walk: A Smartphone Physical Activity Program for African American WomenR00HL129012 · NHLBI · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI JOSEPH, RODNEY · 2017 to 2019
$727k
Smart Walk: A Smartphone Physical Activity Program for African American WomenK99HL129012 · NHLBI · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI JOSEPH, RODNEY · 2015 to 2016
$182k
NHLBI NIH HHS K99 HL129012NHLBI NIH HHS R00 HL129012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reports the results of Smart Walk: a randomized pilot trial of an 8-month culturally tailored, smartphone-delivered physical activity (PA) intervention for African American women with obesity. Sixty participants (age range = 24−49 years; BMI range = 30−58 kg/m2) were randomized to the Smart Walk intervention (n = 30) or a wellness comparison intervention (n = 30). Results supported the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention, as demonstrated by participant retention (85% at 4 months and 78% at 8 months), Smart Walk app use, and intervention satisfaction (i.e., 100% of PA participants completing the intervention [n = 24] reported they would recommend it to friend). Smart Walk participants also reported greater increases in moderate-to-vigorous PA (4-month between-arm difference in change [b] = 43.3 min/week; p = 0.018; Cohen’s d = 0.69; 8-month b = 56.6 min/week; p = 0.046; d = 0.63) and demonstrated clinically relevant, although not statistically significant (p-values > 0.05), baseline to 4 months improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness (b = 1.67 mL/kg/min; d = 0.40), systolic blood pressure (b = −3.33 mmHg; d = 0.22), diastolic blood pressure (b = −4.28 mmHg; d = 0.37), and pulse wave velocity (b = −0.46 m/s; d = 0.33). Eight-month cardiometabolic outcomes followed similar trends, but had high rates of missing data (45−53%) due to COVID-19 restrictions. Collectively, findings demonstrated favorable outcomes for acceptability and feasibility, while also highlighting key areas for refinement in future research.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCOVID-19AdultBlack or African AmericanExerciseFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPulse Wave AnalysisSmartphoneYoung AdultBlack womencardiovascular diseaseexercisehealth disparitieshealth equityhealth promotionmHealthphysical activitytype 2 diabeteswomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID36673756
PMCPMC9859082

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.