| Title |
The effect of communicating the genetic risk of cardiometabolic disorders on motivation and actual engagement in preventative lifestyle modification and clinical outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Nutrition, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1017/s0007114516002488 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sherly X. Li, Zheng Ye, Kevin Whelan, Helen Truby |
| Abstract |
Genetic risk prediction of chronic conditions including obesity, diabetes and CVD currently has limited predictive power but its potential to engage healthy behaviour change has been of immense research interest. We aimed to understand whether the latter is indeed true by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating whether genetic risk communication affects motivation and actual behaviour change towards preventative lifestyle modification. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCT) since 2003 investigating the impact of genetic risk communication on health behaviour to prevent cardiometabolic disease, without restrictions on age, duration of intervention or language. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses for perceived motivation for behaviour change and clinical changes (weight loss) and a narrative analysis for other outcomes. Within the thirteen studies reviewed, five were vignette studies (hypothetical RCT) and seven were clinical RCT. There was no consistent effect of genetic risk on actual motivation for weight loss, perceived motivation for dietary change (control v. genetic risk group standardised mean difference (smd) -0·15; 95 % CI -1·03, 0·73, P=0·74) or actual change in dietary behaviour. Similar results were observed for actual weight loss (control v. high genetic risk SMD 0·29 kg; 95 % CI -0·74, 1·31, P=0·58). This review found no clear or consistent evidence that genetic risk communication alone either raises motivation or translates into actual change in dietary intake or physical activity to reduce the risk of cardiometabolic disorders in adults. Of thirteen studies, eight were at high or unclear risk of bias. Additional larger-scale, high-quality clinical RCT are warranted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 Kingdom | 3 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| Portugal | 1 | 11% |
| Ireland | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 6 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 138 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 11% |
| Researcher | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 16% |
| Unknown | 44 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 6% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 14% |
| Unknown | 50 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,226,449
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Nutrition
#2,544
of 6,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,417
of 370,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Nutrition
#30
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 370,487 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 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.