Dataset Information

Effectiveness of pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions in improving physical activity and health-related outcomes among college students: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although the pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions (PABI) have demonstrated efficacy in improving physical activity (PA) and health-related outcomes, the dearth of empirical evidence in college students warrants further investigation.

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to examine the effects of PABI on improving PA and health-related outcomes among college students.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were searched for relevant literature from inception to 20 February 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted among college students with PABI to increase objectively measured PA as the primary outcome were included in this study.

Results

A total of nine RCTs with 527 participants were included in this study. The combined results showed that PABI significantly improved PA (standardized mean difference = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.08, 0.74, P = 0.016) and significantly contributed to weight loss (mean differences (MD) = -1.56 kg, 95% CI: -2.40 kg, -0.73 kg, P < 0.01), and lower body mass index (MD = -0.33 kg/m², 95% CI: -0.66 kg/m², 0.00 kg/m², P = 0.05) compared to the control group, but no significant effects were observed on improvements of body fat (%) and exercise self-efficacy. Interventions in the group of step, general students, pedometer-based intervention, theory, and developed region were significantly more effective in subgroup analyses.

Conclusions

PABI was found to be effective in promoting PA and weight loss among college students. Future research is needed to further explore the long-term effects of PABI and the characteristics of multiple intervention models.

SUBMITTER: Peng S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10364418 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions in improving physical activity and health-related outcomes among college students: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Peng Sanying S Othman Ahmad Tajuddin AT Khairani Ahmad Zamri AZ Zeng Gao G Xiaogang Zhou Z Fang Yuan Y

Digital health 20230101

<h4>Background</h4>Although the pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions (PABI) have demonstrated efficacy in improving physical activity (PA) and health-related outcomes, the dearth of empirical evidence in college students warrants further investigation.<h4>Objective</h4>This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to examine the effects of PABI on improving PA and health-related outcomes among college students.<h4>Methods</h4>PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PsycI ...[more]

PMID: 37492032

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAccelerometers and pedometers are accessible technologies that could have a role in encouraging physical activity (PA) in line with current recommendations. However, there is no solid evidence of their association with PA in participants with 1 or more cardiometabolic conditions such as diabetes, prediabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease.ObjectivesTo assess the association of accelerometer- and pedometer-based interventions with increased activity and other improved health outcomes in adults with cardiometabolic conditions and to examine characteristics of the studies that could influence the association of both interventions in improving PA.Data sourcesRecords from MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and PsycINFO were searched from inception until August 2018 with no language restriction.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials or cluster randomized clinical trials evaluating the use of wearable technology devices such as pedometers and accelerometers as motivating and monitoring tools for increasing PA were included. After removing duplicates, the searches retrieved 5762 references. Following abstract and title screening of 1439 references and full-text screening of 107 studies, 36 studies met inclusion criteria.Data extraction and synthesisMean difference in PA was assessed by random-effects meta-analysis. Where the scale was different across studies, the standardized mean difference was used instead. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic and explored using mixed-effects metaregression. This study was registered with PROSPERO and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was objectively measured PA in the short to medium term (postintervention to 8 months' follow-up).ResultsThirty-six randomized clinical trials (20 using accelerometers and 16 using pedometers) involving 5208 participants were eligible for review. Meta-analysis involving 32 of these trials (4856 participants) showed medium improvements in PA: accelerometers and pedometers combined vs comparator showed a small significant increase in PA overall (standardized mean difference, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.28-0.51]; I2 = 60% [95% CI, 41%-73%]) in studies of short to medium follow-up over a mean (SD) of 32 (28.6) weeks. Multivariable metaregression showed improved association with PA for complex interventions that involved face-to-face consultation sessions with facilitators (β = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17-0.55; P < .001) and pedometer-based interventions (β = 0.30; 95% CI, 0.08-0.52; P = .002).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, complex accelerometer- and pedometer-based interventions led to significant small to medium improvements in PA levels of people with cardiometabolic conditions. However, longer-term trials are needed to assess their performance over time. This study found no evidence that simple self-monitored interventions using either pedometers or accelerometers are associated with improvements in PA.

Project description:BackgroundRecent studies offer conflicting conclusions about the effectiveness of digital health interventions in changing physical activity behaviors. In addition, research focusing on digital health interventions for college students remains relatively scarce.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine the impact of digital health interventions on physical activity behaviors among college students, using objective measures as outcome indicators.MethodsIn accordance with the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across several databases, including MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO (CINAHL Plus with full text), to identify relevant intervention studies published up to June 6, 2023. The inclusion criteria specified studies that examined the quantitative relationships between digital health interventions and physical activity among adults aged 18 years to 29 years, focusing on light physical activity (LPA), moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), sedentary time (ST), or steps. Non-randomized controlled trials were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were synthesized both narratively and quantitatively, where applicable. When sufficient homogeneity was found among studies, a random-effects model was used for meta-analysis to account for variability.ResultsIn total, 8 studies, encompassing 569 participants, were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes measured were LPA, MVPA, ST, and steps. Among these studies, 3 reported on LPA, 5 on MVPA, 5 on ST, and 3 on steps. The meta-analysis revealed a significant increase in steps for the intervention group compared with the control group (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.64, 95% CI 0.37-0.92; P<.001). However, no significant differences were observed between the intervention and control groups regarding LPA (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.16; P=.51), MVPA (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.22; P=.88), and ST (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.24; P=.78).ConclusionsDigital health interventions are effective in increasing steps among college students; however, their effects on LPA, MVPA, and sedentary behavior are limited.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42024533180; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=533180.

Project description:BackgroundAs mobile technology continues expanding, researchers have been using mobile phones to conduct health interventions (mobile health-mHealth-interventions). The multiple features of mobile phones offer great opportunities to disseminate large-scale, cost-efficient, and tailored messages to participants. However, the interventions to date have shown mixed results, with a large variance of effect sizes (Cohen d=-0.62 to 1.65).ObjectiveThe study aimed to generate cumulative knowledge that informs mHealth intervention research. The aims were twofold: (1) to calculate an overall effect magnitude for mHealth interventions compared with alternative interventions or conditions, and (2) to analyze potential moderators of mHealth interventions' comparative efficacy.MethodsComprehensive searches of the Communication & Mass Media Complete, PsycINFO, Web of Knowledge, Academic Search Premier, PubMed and MEDLINE databases were conducted to identify potentially eligible studies in peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, and dissertations and theses. Search queries were formulated using a combination of search terms: "intervention" (Title or Abstract) AND "health" (Title or Abstract) AND "*phone*" OR "black-berr*" (OR mHealth OR "application*" OR app* OR mobile OR cellular OR "short messag*" OR palm* OR iPhone* OR MP3* OR MP4* OR iPod*) (Title or Abstract). Cohen d was computed as the basic unit of analysis, and the variance-weighted analysis was implemented to compute the overall effect size under a random-effects model. Analysis of variance-like and meta-regression models were conducted to analyze categorical and continuous moderators, respectively.ResultsThe search resulted in 3424 potential studies, the abstracts (and full text, as necessary) of which were reviewed for relevance. Studies were screened in multiple stages using explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria, and citations were evaluated for inclusion of qualified studies. A total of 64 studies were included in the current meta-analysis. Results showed that mHealth interventions are relatively more effective than comparison interventions or conditions, with a small but significant overall weighted effect size (Cohen d=0.31). In addition, the effects of interventions are moderated by theoretical paradigm, 3 engagement types (ie, changing personal environment, reinforcement tracking, social presentation), mobile use type, intervention channel, and length of follow-up.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date that examined the overall effectiveness of mHealth interventions across health topics and is the first study that statistically tested moderators. Our findings not only shed light on intervention design using mobile phones, but also provide new directions for research in health communication and promotion using new media. Future research scholarship is needed to examine the effectiveness of mHealth interventions across various health issues, especially those that have not yet been investigated (eg, substance use, sexual health), engaging participants using social features on mobile phones, and designing tailored mHealth interventions for diverse subpopulations to maximize effects.

Project description:Insufficient physical activity (PA) and excessive sedentary behavior (SB) are detrimental to physical and mental health. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify whether e-health interventions are effective for improving PA and SB in college students. Five electronic databases, including Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest, were searched to collect relevant randomized controlled trials up to 22 June 2022. In total, 22 trials (including 31 effects) with 8333 samples were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that e-health interventions significantly improved PA at post-intervention (SMD = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.45, p < 0.001) compared with the control group, especially for total PA (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.10, 0.58, p = 0.005), moderate to vigorous PA (SMD = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.32, p = 0.036), and steps (SMD = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.23, 1.28, p < 0.001. There were no significant effects for both PA at follow-up (SMD = 0.24, 95% CI: − 0.01, 0.49, p = 0.057) and SB (MD = −29.11, 95% CI: −70.55, 12.32, p = 0.17). The findings of subgroup analyses indicated that compared to the control group, interventions in the group of general participants (SMD = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.63, p < 0.001), smartphone apps (SMD = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.19, 0.73, p = 0.001), and online (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.43, p < 0.001) can significantly improve PA at post-intervention. Moreover, the intervention effects were significant across all groups of theory, region, instrument, duration, and female ratio. At follow-up, interventions in groups of developing region (SMD = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.62, p < 0.001), objective instrument (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.23, 1.42, p = 0.007), duration ≤ 3-month (SMD = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.72, 1.39, p < 0.001), and all female (SMD = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.02, 1.56, p = 0.044) can significantly improve PA. The evidence of this meta-analysis shows that e-health interventions can be taken as promising strategies for promoting PA. The maintenance of PA improvement and the effect of interventions in reducing SB remain to be further studied. Educators and health practitioners should focus on creating multiple e-health interventions with individualized components.

Project description:BackgroundWeb-based interventions for multiple health behavior change (MHBC) appear to be a promising approach to change unhealthy habits. Limited research has tested this assumption in promoting physical activity (PA) and fruit-vegetable consumption (FVC) among Chinese college students. Moreover, the timing of MHBC intervention delivery and the order of components need to be addressed.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine the effectiveness of 2 sequentially delivered 8-week web-based interventions on physical activity, FVC, and health-related outcomes (BMI, depression, and quality of life) and the differences in the intervention effects between the 2 sequential delivery patterns. The study also aims to explore participants' experiences of participating in the health program.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial, in which 552 eligible college students (mean 19.99, SD 1.04 years, 322/552, 58.3% female) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: PA-first group (4 weeks of PA followed by 4 weeks of FVC intervention), FVC-first group (4 weeks of FVC followed by 4 weeks of PA intervention), and a control group (8 weeks of placebo treatment unrelated to PA and FVC). The treatment content of two intervention groups was designed based on the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) framework. A total of four web-based assessments were conducted: at baseline (T1, n=565), after 4 weeks (T2, after the first behavior intervention, n=486), after 8 weeks (T3, after the second behavior intervention, n=420), and after 12 weeks (T4, 1-month postintervention follow-up, n=348). In addition, after the completion of the entire 8-week intervention, 18 participants (mean 19.56, SD 1.04 years, 10/18, 56% female) who completed the whole program were immediately invited to attend one-to-one and face-to-face semistructured interviews. The entire study was conducted during the fall semester of 2017.ResultsThe quantitative data supported superior effects on physical activity, FVC, and BMI in the 2 sequential intervention groups compared with the control group. There were no significant differences in physical activity, FVC, and health-related outcomes between the 2 intervention groups after 8 weeks. The FVC-first group contributed to more maintenance of FVC compared with the PA-first group after 12 weeks. Four major themes with several subthemes were identified in the qualitative thematic analysis: PA and FVC behavior, health-related outcomes, correlates of behavior change, and contamination detection.ConclusionsThis study provides empirical evidence for the effectiveness of sequentially delivered, web-based MHBC interventions on PA and FVC among Chinese college students. The timing issue of MHBC intervention delivery was preliminarily addressed. Qualitative findings provide an in-depth understanding and supplement the quantitative findings. Overall, this study may contribute considerably to future web-based MHBC interventions.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03627949; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03627949.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1186/s12889-019-7438-1.

Project description:BackgroundThere are challenges for researchers and clinicians to select the most appropriate physical activity tool, and a balance between precision and feasibility is needed. Currently it is unclear which physical activity tool should be used to assess physical activity in Bronchiectasis. The aim of this research is to compare assessment methods (pedometer and IPAQ) to our criterion method (ActiGraph) for the measurement of physical activity dimensions in Bronchiectasis (BE), and to assess their feasibility and acceptability.MethodsPatients in this analysis were enrolled in a cross-sectional study. The ActiGraph and pedometer were worn for seven consecutive days and the IPAQ was completed for the same period. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 20 (IBM). Descriptive statistics were used; the percentage agreement between ActiGraph and the other measures were calculated using limits of agreement. Feedback about the feasibility of the activity monitors and the IPAQ was obtained.ResultsThere were 55 (22 male) data sets available. For step count there was no significant difference between the ActiGraph and Pedometer, however, total physical activity time (mins) as recorded by the ActiGraph was significantly higher than the pedometer (mean ± SD, 232 (75) vs. 63 (32)). Levels of agreement between the two devices was very good for step count (97% agreement); and variation in the levels of agreement were within accepted limits of ±2 standard deviations from the mean value. IPAQ reported more bouted- moderate - vigorous physical activity (MVPA) [mean, SD; 167(170) vs 6(9) mins/day], and significantly less sedentary time than ActiGraph [mean, SD; 362(115) vs 634(76) vmins/day]. There were low levels of agreement between the two tools (57% sedentary behaviour; 0% MVPA10+), with IPAQ under-reporting sedentary behaviour and over-reporting MVPA10+ compared to ActiGraph. The monitors were found to be feasible and acceptable by participants and researchers; while the IPAQ was accepta ble to use, most patients required assistance to complete it.ConclusionsAccurate measurement of physical activity is feasible in BE and will be valuable for future trials of therapeutic interventions. ActiGraph or pedometer could be used to measure simple daily step counts, but ActiGraph was superior as it measured intensity of physical activity and was a more precise measure of time spent walking. The IPAQ does not appear to represent an accurate measure of physical activity in this population.Trial registrationClinical Trials Registration Number NCT01569009 : Physical Activity in Bronchiectasis.

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions in improving physical activity and health-related outcomes among college students: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effectiveness of pedometer- and accelerometer-based interventions in improving physical activity and health-related outcomes among college students: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets