Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41629267›Full record

Trial reportNature communications2026

A digital platform with activity tracking for energy management support in long COVID: a randomised controlled trial.

Nilihan Em Sanal-Hayes, Lawrence D Hayes, Jacqueline L Mair, Antonio Dello Iacono, Joanne Ingram, Marie Mclaughlin, Jane Ormerod, David Carless, Natalie Hilliard, Rachel Meach and 1 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
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

11 authors.

Nilihan Em Sanal-HayesSchool of Health and Society, University of Salford, Salford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4979-9653
Lawrence D HayesLancaster Medical School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. L.Hayes4@lancaster.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6654-0072
Jacqueline L MairFuture Health Technologies, Singapore-ETH Centre, Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise (CREATE), Singapore, Singapore.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1466-8680
Antonio Dello IaconoSport and Physical Activity Research Institute, School of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Glasgow, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0204-0957
Joanne IngramSchool of Education and Social Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Glasgow, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2419-8181
Marie MclaughlinPhysical Activity for Health Research Centre, Institute for Sport, P.E. and Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Moray House School of Education and Sport, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8330-1869
Jane OrmerodLong-COVID Scotland, Aberdeen, UK.
David CarlessSport and Physical Activity Research Institute, School of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Glasgow, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1617-493X
Natalie HilliardPhysios for ME, London, UK.
Rachel MeachDepartment of Earth Sciences, Durham University, Durham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0272-1760
Nicholas F SculthorpeSport and Physical Activity Research Institute, School of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Glasgow, UK. nicholas.sculthorpe@uws.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8235-8580

Funding

DH | National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) COV-LT2-0010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a 6-month pragmatic randomised controlled trial (RCT; ISRCTN16033549), we compared a just-in-time intervention to support energy management in adults with long COVID (LC) to standard care. Participants received either the 'Pace Me' app and a wearable activity tracker (intervention) or an app only with data entry screens (control). The intervention group received just-in-time messages on energy management when they reached 50%, 75%, and 100% of their daily 'activity allowance'. The primary outcome was post-exertional malaise (PEM) measured by the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire-PEM (DSQ-PEM). Of 369 participants assessed for eligibility, 250 participants were randomised 1:1, and 77 controls and 84 intervention participants were included in the final per-protocol analysis. There was no time by group interaction for the DSQ-PEM. The intervention group value was 48 (95% CI 44-53) at baseline and 46 (95% CI 41-51) post-intervention (arbitrary units). The control group value was 47 (95% CI 42-52) at baseline and 44 (95% CI 39-49) at follow-up (interaction effect p = 0.614, η²p = 0.002; trivial). No individual question exhibited an interaction effect (p > 0.05). Although the intervention had minimal effect compared to control, the substantial recovery rates previously reported in LC, coupled with our wide inclusion criteria may have masked intervention effects. Therefore, future studies should consider this energy management framework in conditions without such recovery rates, such as CFS.

Indexed as

Fitness TrackersPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeAgedCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41629267
PMCPMC12864992

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.