| Title |
Effect of pedometer use and goal setting on walking and functional status in overweight adults with multimorbidity: a crossover clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s107626 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul Y Takahashi, Stephanie M Quigg, Ivana T Croghan, Darrell R Schroeder, Jon O Ebbert |
| Abstract |
Walking can improve functional status, and a pedometer and goal setting can increase walking and, potentially, gait speed. The efficacy of pedometer use and goal setting for increasing step counts among overweight and obese adults with multiple comorbid conditions has not been evaluated. We recruited and randomly assigned obese or overweight adults with multimorbidity to immediate pedometer use with goal setting or delayed pedometer use, using a crossover design. The primary outcome of interest was step count, with secondary outcomes of gait speed and grip strength, with comparison between the intervention and delayed pedometer groups. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of the 130 participants was 63.4 (15.0) years. At 2 months, mean (SD) steps for the immediate pedometer use group (n=64) was 5,337 (3,096), compared with 4,446 (2,422) steps in the delayed pedometer group (n=66) (P=0.08). Within-group step count increased nonsignificantly, by 179 steps in the immediate pedometer group and 212 steps in the delayed pedometer group after 2 months of intervention, with no significant difference between the groups. Gait speed significantly increased by 0.08 m/s (P<0.05) and grip strength significantly increased by 1.6 kg (P<0.05) in the immediate pedometer group. Pedometer use and goal setting did not significantly increase step count among overweight and obese adults with multimorbidity. The absolute step count was lower than many reported averages. Gait speed and grip strength increased with immediate pedometer use. The use of pedometers and goal setting may have an attenuated response in this population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 38% |
| Sweden | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 38% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 149 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 16% |
| Researcher | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 46 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 16% |
| Sports and Recreations | 13 | 9% |
| Psychology | 7 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 13% |
| Unknown | 52 | 35% |
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 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
#7,949,230
of 25,824,818 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#737
of 1,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,557
of 349,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#23
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,824,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,979 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
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 349,829 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.