↓ Skip to main content

Comparing glycaemic benefits of Active Versus passive lifestyle Intervention in kidney Allograft Recipients (CAVIAR): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparing glycaemic benefits of Active Versus passive lifestyle Intervention in kidney Allograft Recipients (CAVIAR): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13063-016-1543-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanne Wilcox, Chantelle Waite, Lyndsey Tomlinson, Joanne Driscoll, Asra Karim, Edward Day, Adnan Sharif

Abstract

Lifestyle modification is widely recommended to kidney allograft recipients post transplantation due to the cardiometabolic risks associated with immunosuppression including new-onset diabetes, weight gain and cardiovascular events. However, we have no actual evidence that undertaking lifestyle modification protects from any adverse outcomes post transplantation. The aim of this study is to compare whether a more proactive versus passive interventional approach to modify lifestyle is associated with superior outcomes post kidney transplantation. We designed this prospective, single-centre, open-label, randomised controlled study to compare the efficacy of active versus passive lifestyle intervention for kidney allograft recipients early post transplantation. A total of 130 eligible patients, who are stable, nondiabetic and between 3 and 24 months post kidney transplantation, will be recruited. Randomisation is being undertaken by random block permutations into passive (n = 65, leaflet guidance only) versus active lifestyle modification (n = 65, supervised intervention) over a 6-month period. Supervised intervention is being facilitated by two dietitians during the 6-month intervention period to provide continuous lifestyle intervention guidance, support and encouragement. Both dietitians are accredited with behavioural intervention skills and will utilise motivational aids to support study recruits randomised to active intervention. The primary outcome is change in abnormal glucose metabolism parameters after 6 months of comparing active versus passive lifestyle intervention. Secondary outcomes include changes in a wide array of cardiometabolic parameters, kidney allograft function and patient-reported outcome measures. Long-term tracking of patients via data linkage to electronic patient records and national registries will facilitate long-term comparison of outcomes after active versus passive lifestyle intervention beyond the 6-month intervention period. This is the first randomised controlled study to investigate the benefits of active versus passive lifestyle intervention in kidney allograft recipients for the prevention of abnormal cardiometabolic outcomes. In addition, this is the first example of utilising behaviour therapy intervention post kidney transplantation to achieve clinically beneficial outcomes, which has potential implications on many spheres of post-transplant care. This study was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry on 27 August 2014 (ClinicalTrials.org Identifier: NCT02233491 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 114 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Researcher 6 5%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 39 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 18%
Psychology 7 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Sports and Recreations 3 3%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 39 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 December 2017.
All research outputs
#15,922,551
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#21
of 45 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,023
of 357,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#23
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 45 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one scored the same or higher as 24 of them.
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 357,331 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.