Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26926674›Full record

SynthesisDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2016

Pedometer intervention and weight loss in overweight and obese adults with Type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis.

X Cai, S H Qiu, H Yin, Z L Sun, C P Ju, M Zügel, J M Steinacker, U Schumann

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pedometer intervention and weight loss in overweight and obese adults with Type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

X CaiDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongda Hospital, Institute of Diabetes, Nanjing, China.
S H QiuDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongda Hospital, Institute of Diabetes, Nanjing, China.
H YinDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongda Hospital, Institute of Diabetes, Nanjing, China.
Z L SunDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongda Hospital, Institute of Diabetes, Nanjing, China.
C P JuDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongda Hospital, Institute of Diabetes, Nanjing, China.
M ZügelDivision of Sports and Rehabilitation Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine II, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
J M SteinackerDivision of Sports and Rehabilitation Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine II, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
U SchumannDivision of Sports and Rehabilitation Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine II, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Universität Ulm · DEZhongda Hospital Southeast University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimAlthough pedometer intervention is effective in increasing physical activity among adults with Type 2 diabetes, its impact on weight loss remains unclear. This meta-analysis was aimed to assess whether pedometer intervention promotes weight loss.

methodsThree different databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English up to April 2015. Studies were included if they investigated the effects of pedometer intervention on weight loss, as measured by BMI or weight. Effect sizes were aggregated using a random-effects model. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to identify potential moderators. Eleven RCTs with 1258 participants were included. All enrolled participants were overweight or obese.

resultsPedometer intervention led to significantly decreased BMI [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.15 kg/m(2) , 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to -0.02 kg/m(2) ] and reduced weight (WMD -0.65 kg, 95% CI -1.12 to -0.17 kg). Dietary counselling seemed to be a key predictor of the observed changes. However, none of the following variables had a significant influence: step goal setting, baseline age, BMI, weight, sex distribution, disease duration, intervention duration, and baseline values or change scores for total or moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. After completion of the pedometer intervention, non-significant declines in BMI and weight were observed during the follow-up periods.

conclusionsPedometer intervention promotes modest weight loss, but its association with physical activity requires further clarification. Future studies are also required to document dietary and sedentary behaviour changes to facilitate the use of pedometers for weight loss in overweight and obese adults with Type 2 diabetes.

Indexed as

ActigraphyCounselingDiet TherapyWeight LossBody Mass IndexDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ExerciseExercise TherapyHumansObesityOverweight

Identifiers

PMID26926674
PMCPMC5071725
OpenAlexW2291528366

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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 Socratic graph.