↓ Skip to main content

Using an electronic activity monitor system as an intervention modality: A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
165 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
Title
Using an electronic activity monitor system as an intervention modality: A systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1947-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zakkoyya H. Lewis, Elizabeth J. Lyons, Jessica M. Jarvis, Jacques Baillargeon

Abstract

Obesity is a growing global health concern that may lead to cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, and cancer. Several systematic reviews have shown that technology is successful in combating obesity through increased physical activity, but there is no known review on interventions that use an electronic activity monitor system (EAMS). EAMSs are defined as a wearable device that objectively measures lifestyle physical activity and can provide feedback, beyond the display of basic activity count information, via the monitor display or through a partnering application to elicit continual self-monitoring of activity behavior. These devices improve upon standard pedometers because they have the ability to provide visual feedback on activity progression, verbal encouragement, and social comparison. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the efficacy and feasibility results of EAMSs within published physical activity interventions. Electronic databases and journal references were searched for relevant articles. Data sources included CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Medline Ovid, PsycINFO, and clinicaltrials.gov. Out of the 1,574 retrieved, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. These articles were reviewed for quality and content based on a risk of bias tool and intervention components. Most articles were determined to be of medium quality while two were of low quality, and one of high quality. Significant pre-post improvements in the EAMS group were found in five of nine studies for physical activity and in four of five studies for weight. One found a significant increase in physical activity and two studies found significant weight loss in the intervention group compared with the comparator group. The EAMS interventions appear to be feasible with most studies reporting continual wear of the device during waking hours and a higher retention rate of participants in the EAMS groups. These studies provide preliminary evidence suggesting that EAMS can increase physical activity and decrease weight significantly, but their efficacy compared to other interventions has not yet been demonstrated. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the overall effect of EAMS, examine which EAMS features are most effective, and determine which populations are most receptive to an EAMS.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 117 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 17%
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Unspecified 8 7%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 24 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 13%
Sports and Recreations 14 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 11%
Computer Science 11 9%
Psychology 9 8%
Other 26 22%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,832,335
of 25,307,332 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,244
of 16,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,128
of 270,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#105
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,307,332 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 270,397 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 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.