Trial reportTrials2018
Relating process evaluation measures to complex intervention outcomes: findings from the PACE-UP primary care pedometer-based walking trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the use and reporting of evaluation frameworks within evaluations of physical activity interventions.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Pooled it
- Process evaluation of the Sophia Step Study- a primary care based three-armed randomized controlled trial using self-monitoring of steps with and without counseling in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- The Cardiac Care Bridge randomized trial in high-risk older cardiac patients: A mixed-methods process evaluation.Journal of advanced nursing · 2021Trial
- Effect of pedometer-based walking interventions on long-term health outcomes: Prospective 4-year follow-up of two randomised controlled trials using routine primary care data.PLoS medicine · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Exploring sedentary behaviour reduction interventions in the primary healthcare setting: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Pragmatic Comparative Effectiveness Trials and Learning Health Systems in Pain Medicine: Opportunities and Challenges.Anesthesiology clinics · 2023Review
- Protocol for a process evaluation of Family Planning Elevated: a statewide initiative to improve contraceptive access in Utah (USA).BMJ open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe PACE-UP trial demonstrated positive effects of a pedometer-based walking intervention on objective physical activity (PA) outcomes at three and 12 months in 45-75-year-old primary care patients, in postal and nurse-supported trial arms compared with controls. We explored associations between process evaluation measures and change in PA outcomes.
methodsThe MRC framework guided process evaluation. Three quantitative measures (nurse session attendance [dose delivered], PA diary completion [fidelity] and pedometer use [fidelity]) were selected as independent variables in multi-level models estimating intervention effectiveness on PA outcomes (changes in step-counts and time in moderate-to-vigorous PA [MVPA] levels in ≥ 10-min bouts).
resultsDose: attending all three nurse sessions compared with 0-2 sessions was associated with an increase in steps/day at three and 12 months of 1197 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 627-1766) and 605 (95% CI = 74-1137), respectively; and MVPA in bouts (min/week) at three and 12 months by 74 (95% CI = 45-103) and 30 (95% CI = 3-57), respectively. Fidelity: postal and nurse groups showed strong positive associations of diary return with steps/day at three months: postal 1458 (95% CI = 854-2061), nurse 873 (95% CI = 190-1555). MVPA in bouts (min/week): postal 64 (95% CI = 33-94), nurse 50 (95% CI = 15-85). At 12 months, only the postal group effects remained statistically significant: steps/day 1114 (95% CI = 538-1689), MVPA 47 (95% CI = 18-75). Regular pedometer use in the postal group only was associated with higher three-month and 12-month steps/day: 1029 (95% CI = 383-1675) and 606 (95% CI = 22-1190), respectively, and with MVPA in bouts at three months: 40 (95% CI = 6-73).
conclusionProcess evaluation measures demonstrated significant associations with PA outcomes at three and 12 months. We cannot infer causality, but the associations between the process measures and PA outcomes suggest that they were important in enabling the trial changes observed and should be considered core components of the PACE-UP nurse and postal interventions. We have shown the MRC framework to be a useful tool for process evaluation of intervention implementation.
trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN98538934 . Registered on 2 March 2012.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.