↓ Skip to main content

The effect of mere measurement from a cardiovascular examination program on physical activity and sedentary time in an adult population

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
The effect of mere measurement from a cardiovascular examination program on physical activity and sedentary time in an adult population
Published in
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13102-018-0090-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa Voigt, Sophie Baumann, Antje Ullrich, Franziska Weymar, Ulrich John, Sabina Ulbricht

Abstract

Measuring physical activity (PA) and sedentary time (ST) by self-report or device as well as assessing related health factors may alter those behaviors. Thus, in intervention trials assessments may bias intervention effects. The aim of our study was to examine whether leisure-time PA, transport-related PA, and overall ST measured via self-report vary after assessments and whether a brief tailored letter intervention has an additional effect. Among a sample of subjects with no history of myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular intervention, a number of 175 individuals participated in a study comprising multiple repeated assessments. Of those, 153 were analyzed (mean age 54.5 years, standard deviation = 6.2; 64% women). At baseline, participants attended a cardiovascular examination (standardized measurement of blood pressure and waist circumference, blood sample taking) and wore an accelerometer for seven days. At baseline and after 1, 6, and 12 months, participants completed the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. A random subsample received a tailored counseling letter intervention at month 1, 3, and 4. Changes in PA and ST from baseline to 12-month follow-up were analyzed using random-effects modelling. From baseline to 1-month assessment, leisure-time PA did not change (Incidence rate ratio = 1.13, p = .432), transport-related PA increased (Incidence rate ratio = 1.45, p = .023), and overall ST tended to decrease (b = - 1.96, p = .060). Further, overall ST decreased from month 6 to month 12 (b = - 0.52, p = .037). Time trends of the intervention group did not differ significantly from those of the assessment-only group. Results suggest an effect of measurements on PA and ST. Data of random-effects modelling results revealed an increase of transport-related PA after baseline to 1-month assessment. Decreases in overall ST may result from repeated assessments. A brief tailored letter intervention seemed to have no additional effect. Thus, measurement effects should be considered when planning intervention studies and interpreting intervention effects. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02990039. Registered 7 December 2016. Retrospectively registered.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 13%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Master 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 5 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 17%
Psychology 3 13%
Computer Science 2 8%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 8 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,705,604
of 13,104,802 outputs
Outputs from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#107
of 193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,056
of 346,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,104,802 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.